-
1492Manipulating Morality: Third‐Party Intentions Alter Moral Judgments by Changing Causal ReasoningCognitive Science 38 (8): 1320-1347. 2014.The present studies investigate how the intentions of third parties influence judgments of moral responsibility for other agents who commit immoral acts. Using cases in which an agent acts under some situational constraint brought about by a third party, we ask whether the agent is blamed less for the immoral act when the third party intended for that act to occur. Study 1 demonstrates that third-party intentions do influence judgments of blame. Study 2 finds that third-party intentions only inf…Read more
-
9Manipulating Morality: Third-Party Intentions Alter Moral Judgments by Changing Causal ReasoningCognitive Science 39 (6): 1320-1347. 2015.
-
14Even his friend said he's bad: Children think personal alliances bias gossipCognition 204 (C): 104376. 2020.
-
16Who are “we”? Dealing with conflicting moral obligationsBehavioral and Brain Sciences 43. 2020.Satisfying one's obligations is an important part of being human. However, people's obligations can often prescribe contradictory behaviors. Moral obligations conflict, and so do obligations to different groups. We propose that a broader framework is needed to account for how people balance different social and moral obligations.
-
17When and Why People Evaluate Negative Reciprocity as More Fair Than Positive ReciprocityCognitive Science 43 (8). 2019.If you are kind to me, I am likely to reciprocate and doing so feels fair. Many theories of social exchange assume that such reciprocity and fairness are well aligned with one another. We argue that this correspondence between reciprocity and fairness is restricted to interpersonal dyads and does not govern more complex multilateral interactions. When multiple people are involved, reciprocity leads to partiality, which may be seen as unfair by outsiders. We report seven studies, conducted with p…Read more
-
28No Harm, Still Foul: Concerns About Reputation Drive Dislike of Harmless PlagiarizersCognitive Science 42 (S1): 213-240. 2018.Across a variety of situations, people strongly condemn plagiarizers who steal credit for ideas, even when the theft in question does not appear to harm anyone. Why would people react negatively to relatively harmless acts of plagiarism? In six experiments, we predict and find that these negative reactions are driven by people's aversion toward agents who attempt to falsely improve their reputations. In Studies 1–3, participants condemn plagiarism cases that they agree are harmless. This effect …Read more
-
21Reality vs. rhetoric – a survey and evaluation of tsetse control in East AfricaAgriculture and Human Values 18 (2): 219-233. 2001.Odor baited methods of controlling tsetse have received considerable attention as ecologically friendly ways for African farmers to reduce their levels of livestock trypanosomosis. Over the last decade, a number of tsetse control projects have been set up in East Africa using these methods. Although much has been written, few hard data are available regarding their ongoing success, problems, and sustainability. To evaluate the situation on the ground, the authors conducted a series of site visit…Read more
-
157Children Apply Principles of Physical Ownership to IdeasCognitive Science 36 (8): 1383-1403. 2012.Adults apply ownership not only to objects but also to ideas. But do people come to apply principles of ownership to ideas because of being taught about intellectual property and copyrights? Here, we investigate whether children apply rules from physical property ownership to ideas. Studies 1a and 1b show that children (6–8 years old) determine ownership of both objects and ideas based on who first establishes possession of the object or idea. Study 2 shows that children use another principle of…Read more
-
40Lab support for strong reciprocity is weak: Punishing for reputation rather than cooperationBehavioral and Brain Sciences 35 (1): 39-39. 2012.Strong reciprocity is not the only account that can explain costly punishment in the lab; it can also be explained by reputation-based accounts. We discuss these two accounts and suggest what kinds of evidence would support the two different alternatives. We conclude that the current evidence favors a reputation-based account of costly punishment.
-
47Not all mutualism is fair, and not all fairness is mutualisticBehavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (1). 2013.The target article convincingly argues that mutualistic cooperation is supported by partner choice. However, we will suggest that mutualistic cooperation is not the basis of fairness; instead, fairness is based on impartiality. In support of this view, we show that adults are willing to destroy others' resources to avoid inequality, a result predicted by impartiality but not by mutualistic cooperation
-
22All inequality is not equal: children correct inequalities using resource valueFrontiers in Psychology 4. 2013.