12 research outputs found
Weighing Outcome vs. Intent Across Societies: How cultural models of mind shape moral reasoning
Mental state reasoning has been theorized as a core feature of how we navigate our social
worlds, and as especially vital to moral reasoning. Judgments of moral wrong-doing and punish
worthiness often hinge upon evaluations of the perpetratorâs mental states. In two studies, we
examine how differences in cultural conceptions about how one should think about othersâ minds
influence the relative importance of intent vs. outcome in moral judgments. We recruit
participation from three societies, differing in emphasis on mental state reasoning: Indigenous
iTaukei Fijians from Yasawa Island (Yasawans) who normatively avoid mental state inference in
favor of focus on relationships and consequences of actions; Indo-Fijians who normatively
emphasize relationships but do not avoid mental state inference; and North Americans who
emphasize individual autonomy and interpreting othersâ behaviors as the direct result of mental
states. In study 1, Yasawan participants placed more emphasis on outcome than Indo-Fijians or
North Americans by judging accidents more harshly than failed attempts. Study 2 tested whether
underlying differences in the salience of mental states drives study 1 effects by inducing
Yasawan and North American participants to think about thoughts vs. actions before making
moral judgments. When induced to think about thoughts, Yasawan participants shifted to judge
failed attempts more harshly than accidents. Results suggest that culturally-transmitted concepts
about how to interpret the social world shape patterns of moral judgments, possibly via mental
state inference