Citation

Royzman EB, Leeman RF, Baron J. Cognition 2009; 112(1): 159-174.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, 3720 Walnut St., Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. royzman@psych.upenn.edu

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.cognition.2009.04.004

PMID

19439283

Abstract

In this paper, we offer an overview and a critique of the existing theories of the moral-conventional distinction, with emphasis on Nichols's [Nichols, S. (2002). Norms with feeling: Towards a psychological account of moral judgment. Cognition, 84, 221-236] neo-sentimentalist approach. After discussing some distinctive features of Nichols's (2002) thesis and situating it within the context of his predecessors' work [Blair, R. (1995). A cognitive developmental approach to morality: Investigating the psychopath. Cognition, 57, 1-29; Turiel, E. (1983). The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press], we review a number of arguments and findings within the developmental literature that, collectively, pose a serious challenge to the proposition that emotion is indispensable for or plays a substantial contributory role in the construction of the moral domain. Furthermore, we report two studies whose results contravene those of Nichols's (2002) Experiments 1 and 2 (the empirical basis for his "norms with feelings" hypothesis), while favoring a version of Turiel's (1983) harm-based approach instead.

Language: en