Availability of Moral Schemas as a Basis for Spontaneous Judgments about Moral Qualities
https://doi.org/10.25205/2658-4506-2021-14-1-83-94
Abstract
Basic ideas of socio-cognitive approach are considered. This approach explains the moral personality from the viewpoint of availability of cognitive schemas. The results of testing the experimental model of D. Narvaez, D. Lapsley, S. Hagele and B. Lasky on Russian sample are presented. Primary trait inference method was used to determine if people with availability of moral schemas were more likely to make spontaneous inferences about moral qualities than people with availability of other types of schemas. The obtained results of the study coincided with the results of D. Narvaez et al. in conclusion that availability of moral constructions affects the processing of social information. People with a greater availability of moral schemas were more likely to make spontaneous inferences about moral qualities than people more oriented on other cognitive schemas.
About the Authors
E. Y. Shubaderova
Novosibirsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ekaterina Yu. Shubaderova, Bachelor of Psychology
Novosibirsk
O. N. Pervushina
Novosibirsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Olga N. Pervushina, Candidate of Sciences (Psychology)
Novosibirsk
Scopus Author ID 57190754195
RSCI AuthorID 406156
References
1. Bargh J. A. (1989). Conditional automaticity: Varieties of automatic influence in social perception and cignition. In: J. S. Uleman, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.). Unintended thought (pp. 3–51). New York: Guilford.
2. Bargh, J. A., Lombardi, W., & Higgins, E. T. (1988). Automaticity of chronically accessible constructs in Person Situation effects on person perception: It's just a matter of time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 599–605.
3. Bartels D. M. (2008). Principled moral sentiment and the flexibility of moral judgment and decision making. Cognition, 108, 381–417.
4. Blasi A. Moral identity: Its role in moral functioning. (1984). In: W. M. Kurtines, & J. J. Gewirtz (Eds.), Morality, moral behavior and moral development (pp. 128– 139). New York: Wiley.
5. Broeders R., van den Bos K., Müller P. A., & Ham J. (2011). Should I save or should I not kill? How people solve moral dilemmas depends on which rule is most accessible. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 923–934.
6. Bugental D. B., & Goodnow J. J. (1998). In: W. Damon, & N. Eisenberg (Eds.). Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotion Al and personality development (pp. 389–462). New York: Wiley.
7. Cervone D., & Shoda Y. (1999). The coherence of personality: Social-cognitive bases of consistency, vari-ability and organization. New York: Guilford Press.
8. Cantor N. (1990). From thought to behavior: “Having” and “doing” in the study of personality and cignition. American Psychologist, 45, 735–750.
9. Hastie R. (1981). Schematic principles in human memory. In: E. T. Higgins, C. P. Herman, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.). Social cognition: Vol. 1. The Ontario Symposium. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Higgins E. T. (1990). Personality, social psychology, and person-situation relations: Standards and knowledge activation as a common language. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.). Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 301–338). New York: Guilford Press.
11. Higgins E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability and salience. In: E. T. Higgins, & A. E. Kruglanski (Eds.). Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133–168). New York: Guilford Press.
12. Higgins E. T. (1999). Persons and situations: Unique explanatory principles or variability in general principles? In: D. Cervone & Y. Shoda (Eds.). The coherence of personality: Social-cognitive based of consistency, variability and organization (pp. 61–93). New York: Guilford Press.
13. Mischel W. (1990). Personality dispositions revisited and revised: A view after three decades. In: L. A. Pervin (Ed.). Handbook of personality: Theory and research. (pp. 111–134). New York: Guilford.
14. Narvaez D., & Lapsley D. K. (2005). The Psychological Foundations of Everyday Morality and Moral Expertise. In: D. K. Lapsley, & F. C. Power (Eds.). Character psychology and character education (pp. 140–165). University of Notre Dame Press.
15. Narvaez D., Lapsley D. K., Hagele S., & Lasky B. (2006). Moral chronicity and social information processing: Tests of a social cognitive approach to the moral personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 40 (6), 966–985.
16. Waldmann M. R., & Dieterich J. H. (2007). Throwing a bomb on a person versus throwing a person on a bomb. Psychological Science, 18, 247–253.
17. Zelli A., Huesmann L. R., & Cervone, D. (1995). Social inference and individual differences in aggression: Evidence for spontaneous judgments of hostility. Aggressive Behavior, 21, 405–417.
Review
For citations:
Shubaderova E.Y., Pervushina O.N. Availability of Moral Schemas as a Basis for Spontaneous Judgments about Moral Qualities. Reflexio. 2021;14(1):83-94. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/2658-4506-2021-14-1-83-94
Views:
252
Email this article 
