Models of moral decision making: Literature review and research agenda for discrete choice analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 69-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caspar G. Chorus
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Discrete Choice ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Discrete Choice Analysis ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Choice Analysis

Are People Trained in Economics “Different,” and if so, Why? A Literature Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 246-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Niklas Hellmich
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Neoclassical Economics ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Homo Economicus ◽  
Cognitive Frames ◽  
Field Evidence ◽  
Comprehensive Picture ◽  
Jel Classifications

Some argue that frequent confrontation with the homo economicus actor-concept motivates economists to adjust their behavior to that paradigm. Another thesis is that economists are different because the discipline attracts individuals with preferences that differ from those of noneconomists. This article discusses survey, experimental, and field evidence collected during this debate. In certain situations, there appear differences between the behavior of people trained in economics and other groups, but as the existing evidence is mostly ambiguous, a comprehensive picture of the nature and sources of these differences has not yet emerged. The article concludes that economics teachers and researchers should pay more attention to the influence the normative statements inherent in basic neoclassical economics can have on cognitive frames and interindividual processes in moral decision making. JEL Classifications: A13, A2

scholarly journals An explanation of apology acceptance based on lay peoples’ insights

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Strickland ◽  
Katie Martin ◽  
Alfred Allan ◽  
Maria M. Allan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Theoretical Explanation ◽  
Theoretical Uncertainty ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Lay People ◽  
Cognitive Theories

Apologies play an important role in forgiveness, but the pathway from apology to forgiveness is unclear. Many researchers use Goffman’s model of the corrective interchange, or models derived from it to guide their research. This model is based on the assumption that offenders apologise to victims who accept these apologies and that this leads to forgiveness. The acceptance of the apology is therefore central in this model, so we undertook a systematic literature review to determine how researchers conceptualise and measure apology acceptance and found a lack of clarity around the construct. We addressed this theoretical uncertainty by exploring whether lay people distinguish between apology acceptance and forgiveness, and if they do, how they describe apology acceptance. We use contemporary neuro-cognitive theories that explain social and moral decision-making and behaviour to integrate the themes we identified to develop a preliminary theoretical explanation of how the apology acceptance stage fits into Goffman’s model.

Leadership, morality and ethics: Developing a practical model for moral decision-making

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfred W. Kaszniak ◽  
Cynda H. Rushton ◽  
Joan Halifax
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Applied Ethics ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Contemplative Science ◽  
Practical Model

The present paper is the product of collaboration between a neuroscientist, an ethicist, and a contemplative exploring issues around leadership, morality, and ethics. It is an exploration on how people in roles of responsibility can better understand how to engage in discernment processes with more awareness and a deeper sense of responsibility for others and themselves. It draws upon recent research and scholarship in neuroscience, contemplative science, and applied ethics to develop a practical understanding of how moral decision-making works and is essential in this time when there can seem to be an increasing moral vacuum in leadership.

Framing Morality: How Antecedent-Focused Strategies Can Shape Moral Judgments

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Kappes ◽  
Jay Joseph Van Bavel
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
Moral Dilemmas ◽  
Emotional Reactions ◽  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Process Dissociation ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
First Response ◽  
High Conflict

From moral philosophy to programming driverless cars, scholars have long been interested in how to shape moral decision-making. We examine how framing can impact moral judgments either by shaping which emotional reactions are evoked in a situation (antecedent-focused) or by changing how people respond to their emotional reactions (response-focused). In three experiments, we manipulated the framing of a moral decision-making task before participants judged a series of moral dilemmas. Participants encouraged to go “with their first” response beforehand favored emotion-driven judgments on high-conflict moral dilemmas. In contrast, participants who were instructed to give a “thoughtful” response beforehand or who did not receive instructions on how to approach the dilemmas favored reason-driven judgments. There was no difference in response-focused control during moral judgements. Process-dissociation confirmed that people instructed to go with their first response had stronger emotion-driven intuitions than other conditions. Our results suggest that task framing can alter moral intuitions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document