Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAktaş, Büşra
dc.contributor.authorYilmaz, O.
dc.contributor.authorBahçekapili, H. G.
dc.date.accessioned2017-10-16T08:20:32Z
dc.date.available2017-10-16T08:20:32Z
dc.date.issued2017-05
dc.identifier.issn1930-2975en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10679/5672
dc.identifier.urihttp://journal.sjdm.org/17/17207/jdm17207.pdf
dc.description.abstractThe psychological correlates of utilitarian choices in sacrificial moral dilemmas are contentious. In the literature, some research (Greene, et al., 2001) suggested that utilitarianism requires analytic thinking while other research (Kahane et al., 2015) showed that utilitarianism is correlated with psychopathy. In the present research, we looked at the relation of several normative views with analytic cognitive style (ACS), psychopathy and real-world utilitarianism in three Turkish samples. In Study 1 (n = 269), we used four ethical dilemmas and asked participants to select one normative principle as the grounds for their judgment in the dilemma: fatalism, virtue ethics, utilitarianism, deontology and amoralism. The results showed that the majority selected the deontological principle. Additionally, there was a considerable amount of fatalistic and virtue ethical justifications. Utilitarianism and psychopathy had a significant positive correlation. In Study 2 (n = 246), we replicated Study 1 and showed a significant relation between ACS and moral minimalism (the view that the sacrificial act is permissible but not necessary). In Study 3, the results showed that the utilitarian option in the sacrificial dilemmas was positively correlated with both real-life utilitarianism and psychopathy, but the latter two variables were not correlated with each other. All in all, the results suggest that some people choose the utilitarian option in moral dilemmas from psychopathic tendencies (as Kahane argued), while others due to real-life utilitarian reasons (as Greene argued). The findings also indicate that virtue ethical and fatalistic justifications cannot be ignored in understanding lay people's moral judgments.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherSociety for Judgment and Decision Makingen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJudgment and Decision Making
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.titleMoral pluralism on the trolley tracks: different normative principles are used for different reasons in justifying moral judgmentsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.peerreviewedyesen_US
dc.publicationstatusPublisheden_US
dc.contributor.departmentÖzyeğin University
dc.identifier.volume12en_US
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage297en_US
dc.identifier.endpage307en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000402423000008
dc.subject.keywordsUtilitarianismen_US
dc.subject.keywordsMoral minimalismen_US
dc.subject.keywordsVirtue ethicsen_US
dc.subject.keywordsSacrificial moral dilemmasen_US
dc.subject.keywordsPsychopathyen_US
dc.subject.keywordsAnalytic cognitive styleen_US
dc.identifier.scopusSCOPUS:2-s2.0-85020091265
dc.contributor.ozugradstudentAktaş, Büşra
dc.contributor.authorFemale1
dc.relation.publicationcategoryArticle - International Refereed Journal - Institutional Graduate Student


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Share this page