PSY222_Project_Two Final 19-8-23

.docx

School

Southern New Hampshire University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

222

Subject

Psychology

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

4

Uploaded by BaronAlpacaMaster1057

1 Project Two Manjulika Chatterjee-Bowen Southern New Hampshire University PSY 222: Research Methods in Psychology Professor Loux August 19, 2023
2 Research Study: Causal Deviance and the Attribution of Moral Responsibility This study aimed to investigate factors influencing moral assessments of actions deviating from intended outcomes, focusing on whether rational strategies or intuitive “feelings" of morality guide judgments (Pizarro et al. 2003). The introduction explored moral responsibility, addressing "causal deviance" (Searle, 1983) and its challenge in assessing culpability. It questioned if indi- viduals instinctively reduce blame for unintended outcomes from intentional actions. The study empirically probed lay judges' blame attenuation for causal deviance (Experiments 1–3) and un- covered cognitive processes in such judgments (Experiment 4), revealing the interplay between rational analysis and intuitive morality. The research employs a systematic approach to study how moral judgments are influenced by actions involving causal deviance. It encompasses four experiments conducted at Yale univer- sity. In Experiment 1, 123 undergraduates evaluated vignettes depicting positive/negative ac- tions in normal/deviant causal chains. Experiment 2 (26participants) replicated this, focusing on intention as the proximal cause. Experiment 3 (17 participants) eliminated last-minute intention changes. Experiment 4 (30 participants) explored rational vs. intuitive perspectives. (Pizarro et al. 2003) The main hypothesis predicts diminished moral responsibility for actions with causal deviance. Even when intentions closely relate to outcomes, participants are expected to reduce blame for such acts. The method aligns with this hypothesis, utilizing diverse scenarios and instructions to examine moral judgments. By systematically altering conditions and perspectives, the study provides insights into moral responsibility attribution in causal deviance cases, bolstering its conclusions. Moral sanctions measurements were used, capturing blame/praise for agent actions. Appropri- ate for conceptual variables, they quantify moral evaluations and alignment with the hypothe- sis. Participants were from Yale University, varying across experiments: 123 in experiment 1, 26 in Experiment 2, 17 in Experiment 3, and 30 in Experiment 4. Participant characteristics aren't fully detailed, employing non-probability convenience sampling targeting Yale undergraduates. While small sample sizes are common in experimental psychology, they enable controlled ma- nipulations. However, relying on a specific university may limit generalizability, affecting external validity. In summary, the study's method and design suit its core hypothesis, systematically ma- nipulating variables and perspectives to investigate moral evaluations. While measurements ef- fectively capture moral judgments, the use of convenience sampling and limited sample sizes could impact broader relevance. The study's results section focuses on participants' moral responsibility judgments and the im- pact of mindset instructions. It examines how people assess actions with causal deviance versus
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help