Variations in judgments of intentional action and moral evaluation across eight cultures

Cognition 164:22-30 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Individuals tend to judge bad side effects as more intentional than good side effects (the Knobe or side- effect effect). Here, we assessed how widespread these findings are by testing eleven adult cohorts of eight highly contrasted cultures on their attributions of intentional action as well as ratings of blame and praise. We found limited generalizability of the original side-effect effect, and even a reversal of the effect in two rural, traditional cultures (Samoa and Vanuatu) where participants were more likely to judge the good side effect as intentional. Three follow-up experiments indicate that this reversal of the side-effect effect is not due to semantics and may be linked to the perception of the status of the protagonist. These results highlight the importance of factoring cultural context in our understanding of moral cognition.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
ROBVIJ
Upload history
Archival date: 2017-04-05
View other versions
Added to PP index
2017-04-05

Total views
324 ( #14,130 of 51,565 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
75 ( #6,660 of 51,565 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.