Dataset Information

Counterfactual thinking in moral judgment: an experimental study.

ABSTRACT: Counterfactual thinking is thinking about a past that did not happen. This is often the case in "if only…" situations, where we wish something had or had not happened. To make a choice in a moral decision-making situation is particularly hard and, therefore, may be often associated with the imagination of a different outcome. The main aim of the present study is to investigate counterfactual thinking in the context of moral reasoning. We used a modified version of Greene's moral dilemmas test, studying both the time needed to provide a counterfactual in the first and third person and the type of given response (in context-out of context) in a sample of 90 healthy subjects. We found a longer response time for personal vs. impersonal moral dilemmas. This effect was enhanced in the first person perspective, while in the elderly there was an overall slowing of response time. Out of context/omissive responses were more frequent in the case of personal moral dilemmas presented in the first person version, with females showing a marked increase in this kind of response. These findings suggest that gender and perspective have a critical role in counterfactual thinking in the context of moral reasoning, and may have implications for the understanding of gender-related inclinations as well as differences in moral judgment.

SUBMITTER: Migliore S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4033199 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Counterfactual thinking in moral judgment: an experimental study.

Migliore Simone S Curcio Giuseppe G Mancini Francesco F Cappa Stefano F SF

Frontiers in psychology 20140520

Counterfactual thinking is thinking about a past that did not happen. This is often the case in "if only…" situations, where we wish something had or had not happened. To make a choice in a moral decision-making situation is particularly hard and, therefore, may be often associated with the imagination of a different outcome. The main aim of the present study is to investigate counterfactual thinking in the context of moral reasoning. We used a modified version of Greene's moral dilemmas test, s ...[more]

PMID: 24904468

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objectives: The existing scales for moral judgment in sport have some limitations when used for cognitive neural research. Developing a set of experimental materials with good validity is thus warranted. The purpose of this study was to develop experimental materials that can be used in cognitive neuroscience research on moral judgment in sport. Design: Study 1 was a qualitative study and Study 2 used a within-subject design. Method: In Study 1, a qualitative method was adopted to assess types of moral misconduct among Chinese athletes, based on news reports of Chinese athletes' moral misconduct collected from the Internet and from interviews with Chinese elite athletes. In Study 2, typical examples were selected from a qualitative analysis based on the types of moral misconduct observed among athletes in Study 1. The examples were then compiled, controlled, and modified. The validity of the developed experimental materials was evaluated. Results: The moral misconduct observed in Chinese athletes can be divided into the following four categories: violent behavior, doping, match-fixing or tanking, and self-reported dishonesty. Subject analysis and item analysis consistently found that the experimental materials developed for moral judgment based on the four categories were significantly different in six aspects, including the rate of participants' agreement to the proposed resolution [F Subject(3, 184) = 236.60, p = 0.00; F Item(3, 156) = 471.17, p = 0.00], decision time [F Subject(3, 184) = 23.69, p = 0.00; F Item(3, 156) = 3.13, p = 0.03], moral conflict [F Subject(3, 184) = 3.70, p = 0.01; F Item(3, 156) = 10.71, p = 0.00], moral acceptability of the behavior [F Subject(3, 184) = 58.22, p = 0.00; F Item(3, 156) = 110.69, p = 0.00], emotional valence [F Subject(3, 184) = 3.41, p = 0.02; F Item(3, 156) = 3.11, p = 0.03], and emotional arousal [F Subject(3, 184) = 1.32, p = 0.27; F Item(3, 156) = 5.09, p = 0.00]. The experimental materials developed were not affected by the type of sport. Conclusions: The developed experimental materials can be used as experimental materials for cognitive neuroscience research on moral judgment in sport.

Dataset Information

Counterfactual thinking in moral judgment: an experimental study.

Publications

Counterfactual thinking in moral judgment: an experimental study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets