Davenport Eloise, Coley John D
Department of Psychology, Conceptual Organization, Reasoning, and Education Laboratory (CORE Lab), Northeastern University, Boston, MA, United States.
Front Psychol. 2025 Jun 27;16:1380048. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1380048. eCollection 2025.
No model to date has integrated findings from teleological explanation with findings from moral reasoning to explore an underlying mechanism of moral cognition. We hypothesize that a preference for teleology, whereby consequences are assumed to be intentional, can explain instances where adults make judgments that seemingly neglect to account for intent. Across two studies, we investigated whether manipulating teleological reasoning influences moral judgment. 291 participants were evaluated in a 2 × 2 experimental design to assess the effects of teleology priming on adults' endorsement of teleological misconceptions and moral judgments. Results provide some evidence that teleological reasoning influences moral judgment, but the findings are limited, context-dependent, and suggest that teleology is unlikely to be a strong influence in the explanation of outcome-based moral judgments.
迄今为止，尚无模型将目的论解释的结果与道德推理的结果整合起来，以探究道德认知的潜在机制。我们假设，对目的论的偏好（即认为后果是有意为之）可以解释成年人做出看似忽视意图的判断的情况。在两项研究中，我们调查了操纵目的论推理是否会影响道德判断。291名参与者通过2×2实验设计进行评估，以评估目的论启动对成年人认可目的论误解和道德判断的影响。结果提供了一些证据表明目的论推理会影响道德判断，但这些发现是有限的、依赖于背景的，并且表明目的论在基于结果的道德判断的解释中不太可能产生强烈影响。
