Substance Abuse Counselors and Moral Reasoning: Hypothetical and Authentic Dilemmas

This exploratory study examined the assumption that the level of moral reasoning (Defining Issues Test; J. R. Rest, 1986) used in solving hypothetical and authentic dilemmas is similar for substance abuse counselors (N = 188). The statistical analyses used were paired‐sample t tests, Pearson product‐moment correlation, and simultaneous multiple regression. This study found that when solving dilemmas of a personal nature (authentic dilemmas), substance abuse counselors' level of moral reasoning was lower. Implications for counselor education are presented.     

Affirmative Action Policies in Academic Job Advertisements: Do They Facilitate or Hinder Gender Discrimination in Hiring Processes for Professorships?

Evidence of female-favoring hiring preferences for assistant professorships suggests that universities can implement affirmative action programs successfully. However, research on the role of applicant gender and the actual use of affirmative action policies in hiring processes for high-level professorships remain scarce. A web-based experiment with 481 economic university members assessed whether evaluators perceived a female applicant as less qualified than a male applicant for an associate professorship position when the job advertisement highlighted the university’s commitment to affirmative action (gender-based preferential selection) but not when it solely highlighted its commitment to excellence (non-gender-based selection). Contrary to previous experimental findings that affirmative action would adversely affect female applicants, evaluators perceived the female applicant as more hirable and ranked her first for the job significantly more often than the male candidate. Furthermore, male evaluators had a stronger preference for the female candidate in the gender-based condition than in the non-gender-based condition and a stronger preference for the male candidate in the non-gender-based condition than in the gender-based condition. Overall, the results provide evidence that gender-based preferential selection policies can evoke their intended effect to bring highly qualified women to high-level professorships, especially when being evaluated by non-beneficiaries of these policies, such as men.

     

Racial Prototypicality,Affirmative Action,and Hiring Decisions in a Multiracial World

This research examined how the racial prototypicality of minority job applicants' faces influenced hiring decisions under different affirmative action (AA) policies: no AA, soft AA (recruitment of minorities with merit‐based hiring), and hard AA (race as a tie‐break factor in hiring). Participants (N=252) evaluated resume/photograph pairs, each containing a Caucasian and a Black applicant, with minority applicants representing three levels of racial prototypicality. The number of jobs awarded to minorities increased as Black racial prototypicality increased. Each level of AA policy strength increased the number of minority hires, but these increases came with a price: AA directives decreased the percentage of minority hires attributed to higher qualifications and increased perceptions that hires were due to AA more than was actually the case.     

Moral judgment and self-reported moral events in adulthood

As part of a 13-year study of the development of reasoning about the Good Life and moral judgment, 29 middle-class, well-educated adults, ranging in age from 18 to 80 years, were interviewed twice, 4 years apart on Standard Form Moral Judgment interviews and were asked to describe their own moral events that occurred recently. Both times, the average moral judgment score on the hypothetical dilemmas was about stage 4. The reasoning in the spontaneously reported moral events was significantly lower, although the two scores were highly correlated. Difference scores between the two were not related to scores on the hypothetical dilemmas. While there were no significant gender differences in scores on the hypothetical dilemmas, there were in scores on spontaneously reported events favoring males. The philosophic quality of the reported events could be easily categorized by traditional moral-philosophic categories; about half of the events contained traditional deontic moral content (moral right); the other half contained material defined as the moral good. The context of most events was interpersonal as opposed to societal. The most frequent issue discussed concerned honesty about financial issues, particularly income tax evasion. Ways to expand the research on adult moral experience are discussed.     

Attitudes Toward Affirmative Action Plans Directed at Blacks: Effects of Plan and Individual Differences1

Non-Black students (N= 178) completed a questionnaire that permitted tests of hypotheses about the bases of attitudes toward affirmative action plans (AAPs) directed at Blacks. Respondents positively evaluated 5 AAPs (race blind, eliminate discrimination, recruitment, training, proportional hiring) and rejected 2 AAPs (weak and strong preferential treatment). Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that attitudes toward the specific AAPs were entirely mediated by judgments of AAP fairness, but were only partly mediated by perceived threats to personal and collective self-interest. Attitudes toward the specific AAPs were more strongly related to details of the AAPs than to individual differences or to attitudes toward affirmative action in general. Attitudes toward affirmative action in general varied with self-interest and racism, but not with belief in the dominant ideology of opportunity.     

The effects of interpersonal relationship and character gender on adolescents' resolutions of moral dilemmas

An experimental study using two forms of the Defining Issues Test [Rest, J. R. (1979). Revised manual for the Defining Issues Test. Minneapolis: Moral Research Project, University of Minnesota.], modified to present either a high degree of relationship among characters or a low degree of relationship among characters, was conducted with 114 college students. The gender of the characters in the dilemmas was also systematically varied. Both male and female students evidenced principled (Stages 5 and 6) reasoning more often when dilemma characters were male than when story characters were female. Participant gender and relationship condition were significant factors in the frequency of Stage 4 reasoning. Male students in the low-relationship condition evidenced Stage 4 (“Law and order”) reasoning most often when story characters were male, while male students, like female students in all conditions, showed Stage 4 reasoning more often when female characters were presented in the high-relationship condition. The degree to which moral decisions were supportive of an affected character revealed more support when story characters were female than when they were male. Results indicate that even in hypothetical situations, moral judgments vary with the gender of the person being judged and to some degree with the relationships among those involved in the dilemma. These findings are consistent with a view that multiple, equally valid approaches to moral judgment might exist and affect the development of male and female students differently.     

Will the "real boy" please behave: dosing dilemmas for parents of boys with ADHD

The use of Ritalin and other stimulant drug treatments for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) raises distinctive moral dilemmas for parents; these moral dilemmas have not been adequately addressed in the bioethics literature. This paper draws upon data from a qualitative empirical study to investigate parents' use of the moral ideal of authenticity as part of their narrative justifications for dosing decisions and actions. I show that therapeutic decisions and actions are embedded in valued cultural ideals about masculinity, self-actualization and success, as well as in moral conceptions of authenticity and personal freedom. I argue that this investigation of parents' moral justifications and dosing dilemmas raises questions about the validity of authenticity as a transcendent moral principle. Moreover, this study demonstrates that in order to be relevant, bioethical analysis of neurocognitive enhancement must engage with ground-up studies of moral principles and decision-making in context.     

道德判断中的性别差异研究

通过问卷形式呈现给被试道德两难故事,对491名大学生的道德判断进行了研究,发现：1）人类道德判断存在着结果主义和非结果主义两种不同的倾向;2）在小范围内道德判断可能存在性别差异,但在大多数情况下,男女道德判断是极其相似的;3）男女道德判断的性别差异更大程度上是研究所假设的情境引起的,而不是真正的道德判断差异。     

Intuitive Probabilities and the Limitation of Moral Imagination

There is a vast literature that seeks to uncover features underlying moral judgment by eliciting reactions to hypothetical scenarios such as trolley problems. These thought experiments assume that participants accept the outcomes stipulated in the scenarios. Across seven studies (N = 968), we demonstrate that intuition overrides stipulated outcomes even when participants are explicitly told that an action will result in a particular outcome. Participants instead substitute their own estimates of the probability of outcomes for stipulated outcomes, and these probability estimates in turn influence moral judgments. Our findings demonstrate that intuitive likelihoods are one critical factor in moral judgment, one that is not suspended even in moral dilemmas that explicitly stipulate outcomes. Features thought to underlie moral reasoning, such as intention, may operate, in part, by affecting the intuitive likelihood of outcomes, and, problematically, moral differences between scenarios may be confounded with non‐moral intuitive probabilities.     

Moral Principles or Consumer Preferences? Alternative Framings of the Trolley Problem

We created paired moral dilemmas with minimal contrasts in wording, a research strategy that has been advocated as a way to empirically establish principles operative in a domain-specific moral psychology. However, the candidate "principles" we tested were not derived from work in moral philosophy, but rather from work in the areas of consumer choice and risk perception. Participants were paradoxically less likely to choose an action that sacrifices one life to save others when they were asked to provide more reasons for doing so (Experiment 1), and their willingness to sacrifice lives depended not only on how many lives would be saved, but on the number of lives at risk (Experiment 2). The latter effect was also found in a within-subjects design (Experiment 3). These findings suggest caution in the use of artificial dilemmas as a key testbed for revealing principled bases for moral judgment.     

Beyond physical harm: how preference for consequentialism and primary psychopathy relate to decisions on a monetary trolley dilemma

When is it appropriate to harm a single person to help multiple others? Psychologists have investigated this question through the study of hypothetical “trolley” dilemmas involving extreme physical harm life-or-death situations that contrast outcome-focussed, consequentialist moral reasoning with principle-focussed, deontological moral reasoning. The present studies investigate whether participants’ preference for consequentialism generalises across domains. We administered traditional physical harm dilemmas as well as a trolley-type dilemma involving monetary harm. Across four studies (N?=?809), an internal meta-analysis demonstrated that participants’ responses to the traditional dilemmas predicted their responses to the monetary dilemma. Additionally, previous research has uncovered that primary psychopathy predicts consequentialist responses on physical harm dilemmas. The current work uncovers that this association does not generalise to monetary harm dilemmas, suggesting that the association between primary psychopathy and consequentialist reasoning is not related to consequentialist reasoning per se, but to the idiosyncrasies of traditional harm-centric trolley dilemmas instead.     

When Fairness Clashes with Personal Autonomy and Parental Authority: A Comparison of Daughters' and Mothers' Reasoning in Two Cultural Contexts in Turkey

The author examined religious and secular daughters' and mothers' reasoning about personal autonomy, maternal authority, and moral concepts in family decision-making situations in urban Turkey. Sixty-eight daughters and 34 mothers were individually interviewed about decision-making autonomy in general issues and hypothetical daughter–mother conflicts. Results indicated participants regardless of their family status and religious background assigned more decision-making autonomy to mothers when evaluating general issues. Analysis of controversial issues as hypothetical conflicts indicated that daughters and mothers do not hold unitary social judgments about the social world that were always consistent with the norms of their community and family status. There were some religious background differences in evaluations of some conflict stories as a function of whether they evaluated the choices as moral, conventional, personal, and prudential matters. Although secular and religious participants conceptualized daughters and mothers in relational terms rather than characterizing the relations and social issues by harmony, obedience to authority, and acceptance of norms findings suggested that secular women evaluated the hypothetical adolescent–mother conflicts more consistently when the issue entails violation of a moral principle such as justice, fairness, and well-being of the other.     

Using an Ecological Ethics Framework to Make Decisions about the Relocation of Wildlife

Relocation is an increasingly prominent conservation tool for a variety of wildlife, but the technique also is controversial, even among conservation practitioners. An organized framework for addressing the moral dilemmas often accompanying conservation actions such as relocation has been lacking. Ecological ethics may provide such a framework and appears to be an important step forward in aiding ecological researchers and biodiversity managers to make difficult moral choices. A specific application of this framework can make the reasoning process more transparent and give more emphasis to the strong sentiments about non-human organisms held by many potential users. Providing an example of the application of the framework may also increase the appeal of the reasoning process to ecological researchers and biodiversity managers. Relocation as a conservation action can be accompanied by a variety of moral dilemmas that reflect the interconnection of values, ethical positions, and conservation decisions. A model that is designed to address moral dilemmas arising from relocation of humans provides/demonstrates/illustrates a possible way to apply the ecological ethics framework and to involve practicing conservationists in the overall decision-making process.     

Diversity,Merit, Fairness,and Discrimination Beliefs as Predictors of Support for Affirmative‐Action Policy Actions1

This paper explores support for hiring policies associated with affirmative action (AA) using a model including beliefs regarding the fairness of AA, merit, value of diversity, prevalence of discrimination, personal self‐interest, and demographic characteristics. Participants (n = 212) evaluated 8 hiring policies ranging from the use of strong preferential treatment to race‐blind policies. Beliefs affected support for policies differently. For example, diversity valuation predicted support for policies involving preferences and recruitment, but predicted opposition to race‐blind approaches, whereas support for the merit principle predicted opposition to preferences and support for race‐blind approaches. Results suggest that established predictors of attitudes toward AA do not necessarily predict support for specific forms of AA.     

Will the “Real Boy” Please Behave: Dosing Dilemmas for Parents of Boys with ADHD

The use of Ritalin and other stimulant drug treatments for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) raises distinctive moral dilemmas for parents; these moral dilemmas have not been adequately addressed in the bioethics literature. This paper draws upon data from a qualitative empirical study to investigate parents' use of the moral ideal of authenticity as part of their narrative justifications for dosing decisions and actions. I show that therapeutic decisions and actions are embedded in valued cultural ideals about masculinity, self-actualization and success, as well as in moral conceptions of authenticity and personal freedom. I argue that this investigation of parents' moral justifications and dosing dilemmas raises questions about the validity of authenticity as a transcendent moral principle. Moreover, this study demonstrates that in order to be relevant, bioethical analysis of neurocognitive enhancement must engage with ground-up studies of moral principles and decision-making in context.     

Care and Justice in Real-Life Moral Reasoning

Moral reasoning of 57 (Time 1) and 59 (Time 2) nursing, social-work and law-enforcement students was investigated in terms of care and justice reasoning about hypothetical and real-life dilemmas. The analysis methods were the Ethic of Care Interview, the Moral Judgment Interview, Lyons' Moral Orientation Scheme and Wark and Krebs' classification of real-life dilemmas. The type of dilemma predicted moral orientation usage. Prosocial dilemmas pulled for care and antisocial dilemmas for justice orientation. Level of justice reasoning varied according to the type of dilemma. Real-life care reasoning was consistent with participants' competence, with the exception of transgression-type dilemmas at Time 2. Levels of care and justice reasoning were highly correlated with each other. These results underscore the importance of the dilemma type and suggest that care reasoning is a significant part of real life morality. The study recommends the ECI as a new model to account for real-life care reasoning.     

Attitudes Toward Affirmative Action: Correlations With Demographic Variables and With Beliefs About Targets,Actions, and Economic Effects1

Two studies assessed beliefs and attitudes toward affirmative action in the workplace. Opposition to affirmative action was most strongly associated with respondent race (White) and political conservatism, the belief that it involves strong actions (preferential hiring and setting aside jobs), and the expectation that it will hurt company performance. Attitudes were also positively associated with perceived frequency of employment discrimination experienced by the target group and negatively associated with their resulting employment opportunities. Regression results revealed that economic consequences for the company overwhelmed beliefs about target group employment opportunities in predicting affirmative action attitudes. Respondents associated aftirmative action most strongly with Black and Hispanic targets, and White respondents whose affirmative action schemas featured these 2 targets had the most negative attitudes.     

Reasoning in the personal and moral domains: Adolescent and young adult women's decision-making regarding abortion

The present investigation of adolescent and young adult women's reasoning, and decision-making about abortion was conducted to determine whether reasoning about abortion could be described by moral, social-conventional, and personal concepts and to examine relationships between domain of reasoning and action choices. Seventy single women, ranging in age from 13 to 31 and divided between 25 women having abortions, 23 women continuing their pregnancies, and 22 never-pregnant women, were administered a semi-structured clinical interview about abortion and two hypothetical moral judgement dilemmas. A classification task was developed to provide an additional measure of reasoning in different domains. Another 29 single, first-pregnant women provided a comparison of the effects of these procedures on decision-making. Content analysis of the protocols revealed that responses to the abortion interview could be reliably distinguished between concepts of morality and personal issues and their coordination or lack of coordination. Subjects treating abortion as a moral issue were more likely to continue their pregnancies while subjects treating abortion as a personal issue were more likely to obtain an abortion. Differences in reasoning between pregnant and nonpregnant subjects were not observed. Moral responses to the abortion interview were found to be highly related to hypothetical moral judgments.     

Moral Reasoning and Rhetoric: The Acceptability of Arguments About AIDS-Related Dilemmas1

The disease AIDS has given rise to a host of social dilemmas. Here we explore the rhetoric that affects people's reasoning about actions taken in the face of such dilemmas. We presented a group of 514 undergraduates with vignettes depicting dilemmas having to do with the distribution of sexually explicit educational material to high school students and with the forced HIV blood testing of factory workers. Subjects rated the acceptability of arguments for and against courses of action taken by persons in the vignettes. The arguments embodied concerns typical of moral reasoning at each of Kohlberg's six stages. We found that the acceptability of stage-typical moral arguments about AIDS-related dilemmas depends on both the dilemma at hand and the course of action being argued for. We argue that knowledge of how people respond to different kinds of moral arguments concerning AIDS-related dilemmas is valuable for informing efforts to advocate humane and lifesaving policies to particular audiences.     

高校学生道德困境研究:日常德性的视角

以45位本科生和硕士研究生为对象, 采用日常德性的视角, 考察高校学生在日常生活中亲历的道德困境, 重点探讨个人日常道德困境的内容, 以及他们对个人日常道德困境的解读和处理。结果表明(1)个人日常道德困境多数不同于假设性的公正取向的道德困境。人们对各类个人日常道德困境的解读和阐释存在个体差异。道德内容主要取决于人们所强调的问题。(2)人们所主张的有助于处理日常道德困境的策略与他们在生活中实际采用的策略是有差异的。在真实的道德选择和决定中, 会有更多利己和实用的考虑。此外, 人们对道德行为的判断多倚重对行为后果(特别是伤害性后果)的考虑。