Construal level and free will beliefs shape perceptions of actors' proximal and distal intent

Frontiers in Psychology 6:135664 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Two components of lay observers’ calculus of moral judgment are proximal intent (the actor’s mind is focused on performing the action) and distal intent (the actor’s mind is focused on the broader goal). What causes observers to prioritize one form of intent over the other? The authors observed whether construal level (Studies 1-2) and beliefs about free will (Studies 3-4) would influence participants’ sensitivity to the actor’s proximal versus distal intent. In four studies, participants read scenarios in which the actor’s proximal and distal intent were independently manipulated. In Study 1, when only distal intent was present in the actor’s mind, participants rated the psychologically distant actor more responsible than the psychologically near actor. In Study 2, when only distal intent was in the actor’s mind, participants with a chronic high level of action identification rated the actor more responsible than did those with a low level of action identification. In both studies, when only proximal intent was in the actor’s mind, construal level did not predict judgments of responsibility. In Study 3, when only proximal intent was present in the actor’s mind, the more participants believed in free will, the more they rated the actor responsible. When only distal intent was in the actor’s mind, free will belief did not influence ratings of responsibility. In Study 4, the same pattern emerged when free will / determinism beliefs were manipulated and the actor performed a positive (life-saving) act. The authors discuss how these results shed new light on the literatures on moral reasoning and psycho-legal theory.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Which Causes of Moral Beliefs Matter?Elizabeth O’Neill - 2015 - Philosophy of Science 82 (5):1070-1080.
Representation is representation of similarities.Shimon Edelman - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):449-467.
Quine E Davidson: Estimulação distal ou proximal?Araceli Velloso - 2005 - Philósophos - Revista de Filosofia 10 (2).
Regular spaces versus computing with chaos.Cees van Leeuwen - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):482-484.
Quine y Davidson: sobre la evidencia.William Duica - 2004 - Ideas Y Valores 53 (125):113-133.
Preface.Richard Gelwick - 1988 - Tradition and Discovery 16 (1):2-2.
Conscious intending as self-programming.Marc Slors - 2015 - Philosophical Psychology 28 (1):94-113.
Distal similarity, shape referents, subjective world, and redundancy.Hannes Eisler - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):470-470.
Positional information in the amphibian limb.J. Faber - 1976 - Acta Biotheoretica 25 (1):44-65.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-06-30

Downloads
26 (#595,031)

6 months
14 (#168,878)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind.John R. Searle - 1983 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind.John R. Searle - 1983 - New York: Oxford University Press.
An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation.Jeremy Bentham - 1780 - New York: Dover Publications. Edited by J. H. Burns & H. L. A. Hart.

View all 50 references / Add more references