Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Morality as an Evolutionary Exaptation.Marcus Arvan - 2021 - In Johan De Smedt & Helen De Cruz (eds.), Empirically Engaged Evolutionary Ethics. Synthese Library. Springer - Synthese Library. pp. 89-109.
    The dominant theory of the evolution of moral cognition across a variety of fields is that moral cognition is a biological adaptation to foster social cooperation. This chapter argues, to the contrary, that moral cognition is likely an evolutionary exaptation: a form of cognition where neurobiological capacities selected for in our evolutionary history for a variety of different reasons—many unrelated to social cooperation—were put to a new, prosocial use after the fact through individual rationality, learning, and the development and transmission (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Infants Consider the Distributor’s Intentions in Resource Allocation.Karin Strid & Marek Meristo - 2020 - Frontiers in Psychology 11.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The interplay between moral actions and moral judgments in children and adults.Janani Prabhakar, Deena Skolnick Weisberg & Alan M. Leslie - 2018 - Consciousness and Cognition 63 (C):183-197.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Foreign language affects the contribution of intentions and outcomes to moral judgment.Janet Geipel, Constantinos Hadjichristidis & Luca Surian - 2016 - Cognition 154 (C):34-39.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Non-linearities in Theory-of-Mind Development.Els M. A. Blijd-Hoogewys & Paul L. C. van Geert - 2017 - Frontiers in Psychology 7.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Effect of Cognitive Load on Intent‐Based Moral Judgment.Justin W. Martin, Marine Buon & Fiery Cushman - 2021 - Cognitive Science 45 (4):e12965.
    When making a moral judgment, people largely care about two factors: Who did it (causal responsibility), and did they intend to (intention)? Since Piaget's seminal studies, we have known that as children mature, they gradually place greater emphasis on intention, and less on mere bad outcomes, when making moral judgments. Today, we know that this developmental shift has several signature properties. Recently, it has been shown that when adults make moral judgments under cognitive load, they exhibit a pattern similar to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Intention Attribution and the Development of Moral Evaluation.Brooke C. Hilton & Valerie A. Kuhlmeier - 2019 - Frontiers in Psychology 9.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The influence of intention, outcome and question-wording on children’s and adults’ moral judgments.Gavin Nobes, Georgia Panagiotaki & Kimberley J. Bartholomew - 2016 - Cognition 157 (C):190-204.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Toddlers Selectively Help Fair Agents.Luca Surian & Laura Franchin - 2017 - Frontiers in Psychology 8.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Social evaluation of intentional, truly accidental, and negligently accidental helpers and harmers by 10-month-old infants.Brandon M. Woo, Conor M. Steckler, Doan T. Le & J. Kiley Hamlin - 2017 - Cognition 168 (C):154-163.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • When a Circle Becomes the Letter O: Young Children’s Conceptualization of Learning and Its Relation With Theory of Mind Development.Zhenlin Wang & Douglas A. Frye - 2021 - Frontiers in Psychology 11.
    In two independent yet complementary studies, the current research explored the developmental changes of young children’s conceptualization of learning, focusing the role of knowledge change and learning intention, and its association with their developing theory of mind ability. In study 1, 75 children between 48 and 86 months of age judged whether a character with or without a genuine knowledge change had learned. The results showed that younger children randomly attributed learning between genuine knowledge change and accidental coincidence that did (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Who Is to Blame? Children's and Adults' Moral Judgments Regarding Victim and Transgressor Negligence.Kelly Lynn Mulvey, Seçil Gönültaş & Cameron B. Richardson - 2020 - Cognitive Science 44 (4):e12833.
    Research has documented that individuals consider outcomes, intentions, and transgressor negligence when making morally relevant judgments (Nobes, Panagiotaki, & Engelhardt, 2017). However, less is known about whether individuals attend to both victim and transgressor negligence in their evaluations. The current study measured 3‐ to 6‐year‐olds (N = 70), 7‐ to 12‐year‐olds (N = 54), and adults' (N = 97, ages 18–25 years) moral judgments about scenarios in which an accidental transgression occurred involving property damage or physical harm. Participants were either (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations