| Abstract: | Tested an ethical ideologies model based on relativism and idealism. 64 undergraduates 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. Exceptionists' (low relativism and idealism) judgments were influenced equally by conformity and consequence. These Ss 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, the more positive was the moral judgment. (23 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
