How Can a Deontological Decision Lead to Moral Behavior? The Moderating Role of Moral Identity

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10551-015-2576-6&domain=pdf

Web End = J Bus Ethics (2016) 137:537549 DOI 10.1007/s10551-015-2576-6

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10551-015-2576-6&domain=pdf

Web End = How Can a Deontological Decision Lead to Moral Behavior? The Moderating Role of Moral Identity

Zhi Xing Xu Hing Keung Ma

Received: 23 January 2014 / Accepted: 10 February 2015 / Published online: 18 February 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Abstract Deontology and utilitarianism are two competing principles that guide our moral judgment. Recently, deontology is thought to be intuitive and is based on an error-prone and biased approach, whereas utilitarianism is relatively reective and a suitable framework for making decision. In this research, the authors explored the relationship among moral identity, moral decision, and moral behavior to see how a preference for the deontological solution can lead to moral behavior. In study 1, a Web-based survey demonstrated that when making decisions, individuals who viewed themselves as moral people preferred deontological ideals to the utilitarian framework. In study 2, the authors investigated the effect of moral identity and moral decision on moral behavior in an experimental study. The results showed that when deontology was coupled with the motivational power of moral identity, individuals were most likely to behave morally.

Keywords Moral decision Ethical predispositions

Deontology Utilitarianism Moral identity Moral

behavior

Introduction

Deontology and consequentialism are frequently discussed in tandem as they are usually thought as two opposing theories in normative ethics. Consequentialism focuses on the utility of an action, while deontology emphasizes the obligation of an individual to adhere to universal moral rules, principle to determine moral behavior (Brady and Wheeler 1996; Kant 1996). Some theorists argue that consequentialism is a more appropriate framework when making moral decisions, since the deontology is usually moral shortcut and commits moral errors (see reviews in Baron and Ritov 2009; Sunstein 2005). Recently, however, Bartels and Pizarro (2011) found that those individuals who are least prone to moral errors also possess a set of psychological characteristics, such as have higher scores on measure of antisocial personality traits, which many would consider prototypically immoral. Though Bartels and Pizarros research has provided evidence to justication for deontological thinking in moral decision, we argue that the existing investigations have disproportionately relied on recording participants responses to sacricial dilemmas. In these types of dilemmas, participants are asking...