Individual differences in information integration during moral judgment.

Abstract

An ethical ideologies model based on relativism and idealism was tested. Subjects judged the morality of an individual who produced a mildly or extremely positive or negative consequence by conforming to or violating a common moral norm. As predicted, an averaging model with differential weights accounted for situationists' (high relativism and idealism) and absolutists' (low relativism and high idealism) judgments; conformity to norms was discounted when the consequence was extremely negative or positive. In contrast, subjectivists' (high relativism and low idealism) judgments conformed to an averaging model; a mildly positive consequence lowered moral judgments of conforming actions. whereas a mildly negative consequence tended to raise moral judgments of nonconforming actions. Last, exceptionists' (low relativism and idealism) judgments were influenced equally by conformity and consequence. These individuals generally combined data in a strictly linear, additive fashion; the more positive the consequence or the greater the conformity of the action to a moral norm, thc more positive the moral judgment.