Is Doing Good Good Enough? A Motivation,Action,Sacrifice,and Temptation (MAST) View of Moral Praiseworthiness

Abstract

We present the Motivation, Action, Sacrifice, and Temptation (MAST) view of moral praiseworthiness and evaluate four components shaping judgments of an actor’s morality: (a) How did the person act? (b) Why did the person act? (c) Did the person sacrifice something when acting? and (d) Was the person tempted to avoid the sacrifice? Across multiple moral domains, we evaluate moral impressions of hypothetical actors who acted ostensibly morally under different motivational, sacrificial, and temptational conditions. Across four studies (total N > 1,200) and 150 morally relevant scenarios, all components shaped moral impressions, with motivational purity having the strongest impact. Exploring motivation more deeply via Self-Determination Theory, we found effects of internalized (vs. externalized) motivations. Broadly speaking, judges prefer actors to act automatically and in an idealized manner rather than with deliberation and effort. This work address questions that have fascinated philosophers, psychologists, and laypeople, advancing understanding of moral impression formation.

Keywords

impression formation morality moral impressions motivation temptation sacrifice

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen

S. A.

(2016, August 3). Is temptation a good thing? https://sueaallen.com/2016/08/03/is-temptation-a-good-thing/

Anderson

R. A.

Crockett

M. J.

Pizarro

D. A.

(2020). A theory of moral praise. Trends in Cognitive Science, 24(9), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.06.008

Andreoni

(1990). Impure altruism and donations to public goods: A theory of warm-glow giving. The Economic Journal, 100(401), 464–477. https://doi.org/10.2307/2234133

Annas

(2011). Intelligent virtue. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199228782.001.0001

Arvanitis

Stichter

(2022). Why being morally virtuous enhances well-being: A self-determination theory approach. Journal of Moral Education, 52(3), 362–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2022.2066640

Berman

J. Z.

Small

D. A.

(2018). Discipline and desire: On the relative importance of willpower and purity in signaling virtue. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 220–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.007

Buckels

E. E.

Jones

D. N.

Paulhus

D. L.

(2013). Behavioral confirmation of everyday sadism. Psychological Science, 24, 2201–2209. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613490749

Carlson

R. W.

Zaki

(2018). Good deeds gone bad: Lay theories of altruism and selfishness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 75, 36–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.11.005

Caviola

Schubert

Greene

J. D.

(2021). The psychology of (in)effective altruism. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25, 596–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.03.015

10.

Champely

Ekstrom

Dalgaard

Gill

Weibelzahl

Anandkumar

Ford

Volcic

De Rosario

(2020). pwr: Basic functions for power analysis (R package Version 1.3-0). https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pwr/

11.

Colby

Damon

(1992). Some do care: Contemporary lives of moral commitment. The Free Press.

12.

Critcher

C. R.

Dunning

(2011). No good deed goes unquestioned: Cynical reconstruals maintain belief in the power of self-interest. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1207–1213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.05.001

13.

Critcher

C. R.

Inbar

Pizarro

D. A.

(2013). How quick decisions illuminate moral character. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(3), 308–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612457688

14.

Cureton

Hill

T. E.

(2018). Kant on virtue: Seeking the ideal in human conditions. In Snow

N. E.

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of virtue (pp. 263–280). Oxford Handbooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199385195.013.13

15.

Eliot

T. S. 1

. (1963). Murder in the cathedral. Harcourt, Brace & World.

16.

Evans

S. C.

Roberts

M. C.

Keeley

J. W.

Blossom

J. B.

Amaro

C. M.

Garcia

A. M.

Stough

C. O.

Canter

K. S.

Robles

Reed

G. M.

(2015). Vignette methodologies for studying clinicians’ decision-making: Validity, utility, and application in ICD-11 field studies. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 15(2), 160–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2014.12.001

17.

Farsides

Sparks

Jessop

(2018). Self-reported reasons for moral decisions. Thinking & Reasoning, 24(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2017.1366946

18.

Fleeson

(2020). Live simply so that others may simply live: Trying to get clarity on the meaning of honesty/humility. European Journal of Personality, 34, 524–526. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2284

19.

Furr

R. M.

(2021). Variability and consistency in the analysis of behavior. In Rauthmann

(Ed.), Handbook of personality dynamics and processes (pp. 733–761). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813995-0.00028-5

20.

Goodwin

G. P.

(2015). Moral character in person perception. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(1), 38–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414550709

21.

Hartley

A. G.

Furr

R. M.

Helzer

E. G.

Jayawickreme

Velasquez

K. R.

Fleeson

(2016). Morality’s centrality to liking, respecting, and understanding others. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7, 648–657. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616655359

22.

Hoffman

Yoeli

Nowak

M. A.

(2015). Cooperate without looking: Why we care what people think and not just what they do. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(6), 1727–1732. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1417904112

23.

Kraft-Todd

G. T.

Rand

D. G.

(2019). Rare and costly prosocial behaviors are perceived as heroic. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 234. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00234

24.

McNamara

R. A.

Willard

A. K.

Norenzayan

Henrich

(2019). Weighing outcome vs. Intent across societies: How cultural models of mind shape moral reasoning. Cognition, 182, 95–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.09.008

25.

Miller

C. B.

(2021). Honesty: The philosophy and psychology of a neglected virtue. Oxford Academic.

26.

Peer

Brandimarte

Samat

Acquisti

(2017). Beyond the Turk: Alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 153–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.01.006

27.

Pelser

A. C.

(2019). Temptation, virtue, and the character of Christ. Faith and Philosophy, 36, 81–101. https://doi.org/10.5840/faithphil2019117119

28.

Pizarro

Uhlmann

Salovey

(2003). Asymmetry in judgments of moral blame and praise. Psychological Science, 14(3), 267–272. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.03433

29.

Roth

Kanat-Maymon

Assor

Kaplan

(2006). Assessing the experience of autonomy in new cultures and contexts. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9052-7

30.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

31.

Sheldon

K. M.

Osin

E. N.

Gordeeva

T. O.

Suchkov

D. D.

Sychev

O. A.

(2017). Evaluating the dimensionality of Self-Determination Theory’s relative autonomy continuum. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(9), 1215–1238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217711915

32.

Snow

N. E.

Wright

J. C.

Warren

M. T.

(2020). Virtue measurement: Theory and applications. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 23, 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-019-10050-6

33.

Stohr

K. E.

(2003). Moral cacophony: When continence is a virtue. The Journal of Ethics, 7(4), 339–363. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026111711649

34.

Tumasjan

Strobel

Welpe

(2011). Ethical leadership evaluations after moral transgression: Social distance makes the difference. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(4), 609–622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0671-2

35.

Twain

(1897). Following the equator, complete. American Publishing Company. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2895/2895-h/2895-h.htm

36.

Visserman

M. L.

Righetti

Impett

E. A.

Keltner

Van Lange

P. A. M.

(2018). It’s the motive that counts: Perceived sacrifice motives and gratitude in romantic relationships. Emotion, 18(5), 625–637. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000344

37.

Walker

L. J.

Frimer

J. A.

(2007). Moral personality of brave and caring exemplars. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 845–860. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.845

38.

Wilson

A. T.

(2018). Honesty as a virtue. Metaphilosophy, 49, 262–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/meta.12303

39.

Wojciszke

Bazinska

Jaworski

(1998). On the dominance of moral categories in impression formation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1251–1263. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672982412001

40.

Wright

J. C.

Warren

M. T.

Snow

N. E.

(2021). Understanding virtue: Theory and measurement. Oxford University Press.

41.

Young

M. J.

Morris

M. W.

(2004). Existential meanings and cultural models: The interplay of personal and supernatural agency in American and Hindu ways of responding to uncertainty. In Greenberg

Koole

S. L.

Pyszczynski

(Eds.), Handbook of experimental existential psychology (pp. 215–230). The Guilford Press.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.07 MB