When right feels wrong: Cognitive biases and the slide towards moral relativism
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71085/sss.04.04.363Keywords:
Moral relativism, Cognitive biases, Quasi-experimental study, Priming, EthicsAbstract
The present study examined how cognitive biases contribute to Unintentional Moral Relativism (UMR)—the inadvertent misapplication of moral standards despite an individual’s intent to act ethically. Using a between-group quasi-experimental design, three experiments were conducted with 70 undergraduate psychology students from a public university in Islamabad to investigate the contrast effect, framing effect, and numerosity bias in moral judgment. Participants evaluated ethically ambiguous scenarios under different priming and presentation conditions. Although group differences across the three phases were statistically insignificant, significant within-group differences emerged when justifications were introduced, indicating that the number of reasons provided influenced perceived ethicality. These findings suggest that contextual and cognitive factors subtly shape moral evaluations, even in cultures emphasising moral absolutes. The study highlights the need for cross-cultural exploration of cognitive biases in ethical decision-making and the development of indigenous theories to better understand moral reasoning in non-Western contexts.
Downloads
References
Arafat, M. Y. (2024). Research ethics: Meaning and principles. International Journal of Academic Multidisciplinary Research, 8(1), 139-144. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4887943
Bentahila, L., Fontaine, R., & Pennequin, V. (2021). Universality and cultural diversity in moral reasoning and judgment. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 764360. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.764360
Bindra, P. C., & Pearce, G. (2022). The effect of priming on fraud: Evidence from a natural field experiment. Economic Inquiry, 60(4), 1854–1874. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.13088
Boyle, B. A., Dahlstrom, R. F., & Kellaris, J. J. (1998). Points of Reference and Individual Differences as Sources of Bias in Ethical Judgments. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 5, 517-525. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017960518974
Brugman, B. C. (2024). How the effects of emphasizing ethics are examined: A systematic review of moral framing experiments. Annals of the International Communication Association, 48(4), 436–455, https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2024.2393845
Fida, R., Ghezzi, V., Paciello, M., Tramontano, C., Dentale, F., & Barbaranelli, C. (2021). The implicit component of moral disengagement: Applying the relational responding task to investigate its relationship with cheating behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48(1), 78-94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220984293
Forsyth, D. R. (1992). Judging the morality of business practices: The influence of personal moral philosophies. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(5–6), 461–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00870557
Harman, G. (2000). Explaining value and other essays in moral philosophy. Oxford University Press.
Helson, H. (1959). Adaptation level theory. In S. Koch (Eds.), Psychology: A study of a science (Vol. 1., pp. 565-621). McGraw-Hill.
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X
Hirsch, C. R., Meeten, F., Krahé, C., & Reeder, C. (2016). Resolving ambiguity in emotional disorders: The nature and role of interpretation biases. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12, 281–305. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-021815-093436
Hunt, N. C., Curtis, M. B., & Rixom, J. M. (2022). Financial priming, psychological distance and recognizing financial misreporting as an ethical issue: The role of financial reporting responsibility. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 102, 101349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2022.101349
Ilicic, J., Brennan, S.M. & Kulczynski, A. (2021). Sinfully decadent: Priming effects of immoral advertising symbols on indulgence. Marketing Letters, 32, 61–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-020-09544-6
James, I. A., Southam, L., & Blackburn, I. M. (2004). Schemas revisited. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy: An International Journal of Theory & Practice, 11(6), 369-377. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.423
Jiang, R., Li, X., Xu, P., & Lei, Y. (2022). Do teachers need to inhibit heuristic bias in mathematics problem-solving? Evidence from a negative-priming study. Current Psychology, 41, 6954–6965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01209-x
Kamrani, F., N, Kamrani., & Kamrani, F. (2022). Eleven years of psychological researches in Pakistan (1995–2006): What titles reveal about Pakistani research. Journal of Professional & Applied Psychology, 3(2), 319–326. https://doi.org/10.52053/jpap.v3i2.117
Karimi, K. (2011). Moral objectivism versus moral relativism: A critical examination [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, The University of Nairobi]. https://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/11295/3640/Karimi
Kellaris, J. J., Boyle, B. A., & Dahlstrom, R. F. (1994). Framing and situational ethics. Marketing Letters, 5, 69-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00993959
Kellaris, J. J., Dahlstrom, R. F., & Boyle, B. A. (1996). Contextual bias in ethical judgment of marketing practices. Psychology & Marketing, 13(7), 677-694. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199610)13:7%3C677::AID-MAR3%3E3.0.CO;2-E
Kellaris. J. J. (2010). Using demonstration experiments to illustrate the pitfalls of unintentional moral relativism. Christian Business Academy Review, 5, 41-46. https://doi.org/10.69492/cbar.v5i0.74
Kleinlogel, E. P., Dietz, J., & Antonakis, J. (2017). Lucky, competent, or just a cheat? Interactive effects of honesty-humility and moral cues on cheating behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(2), 158-172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217733071
Kleiser, S. B., Sivadas, E., Kellaris, J. J., & Dahlstrom, R. F. (2003). Ethical ideologies: Efficient assessment and influence on ethical judgements of marketing practices. Psychology & Marketing, 20(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.10056
O’Fallon, M., & Butterfield, K. (2005). A review of the ethical decision making literature: 1996–2003. Journal of Business Ethics, 59(4), 375–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-2929-7
Pelham, B. W., Sumarta, T. T., & Myaskovsky, L. (1994). The easy path from many to much: The numerosity heuristic. Cognitive Psychology, 26(2), 103-133. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1994.1004
Pulfrey, C., Durussel, K., & Butera, F. (2018). The good cheat: Benevolence and the justification of collective cheating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(6), 764–784. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000247
Rai, T. S., & Holyoak, K. J. (2013). Exposure to moral relativism compromises moral behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(6), 995–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.06.008
Resnik, D. B. (2011). What is ethics in research & why is it important? National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis
Schauster, E., Ferrucci, P., Tandoc, E., & Walker, T. (2021). Advertising primed: How professional identity affects moral reasoning. Journal of Business Ethics, 171, 175–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04429-0
Shariff, A. F., & Norenzayan, A. (2007). God is watching you: Priming God concepts increases prosocial behavior in an anonymous economic game. Psychological Science, 18(9), 803–809. https://org/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01983.x
Sparks, J. R., & Pan, Y. (2010). Ethical judgments in business ethics research: Definition, and research agenda. Journal of Business Ethics, 91, 405-418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0092-2
Sweeney, R., & Kellaris, J. J. (2008). Gimme three good reasons not to do it: The influence of frames, self-generation, and numerosity of justifications on ethical judgment. In M. L. Cronley & D. V. Soman (Eds.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 35, pp. 157–162). Association for Consumer Research.
Tännsjö, T. (2007). Moral relativism. Philosophical Studies, 135, 123–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-007-9083-2
Tindall, I. K., Fu, K.W., Tremayne, K., & Curtis, G. J. (2021). Can negative emotions increase students’ plagiarism and cheating?. International Journal of Educational Integrity, 17, 25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-021-00093-7
Toader, I., Moreno, L., Briñol, P., & Petty, R. E. (2024). Power corrupts and being sure of felt power corrupts even more: Implications for immoral decisions and cheating. European Journal of Social Psychology.55(3) 520-531. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.3099
Tsikandilakis, M., Leong, M.Q., Yu, Z., Paterakis, G., Bali, P., Derrfuss, J., Mevel, P-A., Milbank, A., Tong, E. M. W., Madam, C., & Mitchell, P. (2022). “Speak of the Devil… and he shall appear”: Religiosity, unconsciousness, and the effects of explicit priming in the misperception of immorality. Psychological Research, 86, 37–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-020-01461-7
Wenzel, K., & Reinhard, M.A. (2020). Tests and academic cheating: Do learning tasks influence cheating by way of negative evaluations?. Social Psychology of Education, 23, 721–753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-020-09556-0
Wu, Y. W., Zhong, L. L., Ruan, Q. N., Liang, J., & Yan, W. J. (2020). Can priming legal consequences and the concept of honesty decrease cheating during examinations?. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2887. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02887
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
.png)
