Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy
https://trends.org.br/article/doi/10.1590/2237-6089-2017-0022
Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy
Original Article

European Portuguese adaptation and validation of dilemmas used to assess moral decision-making

Adaptação e validação para português europeu de dilemas utilizados para avaliar a tomada de decisão moral

Carina Fernandes; Ana Ribeiro Gonçalves; Rita Pasion; Fernando Ferreira-Santos; Tiago Oliveira Paiva; Joana Melo e Castro; Fernando Barbosa; Isabel Pavão Martins; João Marques-Teixeira

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2237-6089-2017-0022 Trends Psychiatry Psychother, vol.40, n1, p.38-46, 2018
PDF
SciELO
Downloads: 0
Views: 601

Abstract

Abstract Objective To adapt and validate a widely used set of moral dilemmas to European Portuguese, which can be applied to assess decision-making. Moreover, the classical formulation of the dilemmas was compared with a more focused moral probe. Finally, a shorter version of the moral scenarios was tested. Methods The Portuguese version of the set of moral dilemmas was tested in 53 individuals from several regions of Portugal. In a second study, an alternative way of questioning on moral dilemmas was tested in 41 participants. Finally, the shorter version of the moral dilemmas was tested in 137 individuals. Results Results evidenced no significant differences between English and Portuguese versions. Also, asking whether actions are “morally acceptable” elicited less utilitarian responses than the original question, although without reaching statistical significance. Finally, all tested versions of moral dilemmas exhibited the same pattern of responses, suggesting that the fundamental elements to the moral decision-making were preserved. Conclusions We found evidence of cross-cultural validity for moral dilemmas. However, the moral focus might affect utilitarian/deontological judgments.

Keywords

Cognition, emotion, forensic psychiatry, validation studies, psychometric

Resumo

Resumo Objetivos Validar e adaptar para português europeu um conjunto de dilemas morais amplamente utilizado, que poderá ser aplicado para avaliar a tomada de decisão moral. Além disso, comparou-se a formulação clássica dos dilemas com uma versão alternativa, que incluía uma questão mais focada na moralidade. Finalmente, testou-se uma versão reduzida dos cenários morais. Métodos A versão portuguesa dos dilemas morais foi testada em 53 participantes de várias regiões de Portugal, e a versão alternativa foi testada em 41 sujeitos. Finalmente, a versão reduzida dos dilemas morais foi testada numa amostra de 137 participantes. Resultados Não houve diferenças significativas entre a versão portuguesa e a inglesa. A pergunta “É moralmente aceitável...?” evocou menos respostas utilitárias que a versão original, embora não tenham sido obtidas diferenças significativas. A versão portuguesa original, a alternativa e a reduzida evidenciaram o mesmo padrão de respostas, sugerindo que os elementos fundamentais para a tomada de decisão moral estão preservados. Conclusões Encontramos evidências para a validade intercultural dos dilemas morais. No entanto, o foco moral colocado na questão final pode afetar os juízos utilitários/deontológicos.

Palavras-chave

Emoção, cognição, psiquiatria forense, estudos de validação, psicometria

References

Greene JD, Morelli SA, Lowenberg K, Nystrom LE, Cohen JD. Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment. Cognition. 2008;107:1144-54.

Christensen JF, Flexas A, Calabrese M, Gut NK, Gomila A. Moral judgment reloaded: a moral dilemma validation study. Front Psychol. 2014;5.

Christensen JF, Gomila A. Moral dilemmas in cognitive neuroscience of moral decision-making: A principled review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2012;36:1249-64.

Hauser M., Cushman F., Young L, Jin RKX, Mikhail J. A dissociation between moral judgments and justifications. Mind Lang. 2007;22:1-21.

Kohlberg L. Development of moral character and moral ideology. Review of child development research. 1964:383-432.

Kohlberg L. Stage and sequence: The cognitive-develop mental approach to socialization. Handbook of socialization theory and research. 1969:347-480.

Greene JD, Sommerville RB, Nystrom LE, Darley JM, Cohen JD. An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science. 2001;293:2105-8.

Greene J, Haidt J. How (and where) does moral judgment work?. Trends Cogn Sci. 2002;6:517-23.

Greene JD, Nystrom LE, Engell AD, Darley JM, Cohen JD. The neural basis of cognitive conflict and control in moral judgment. Neuron. 2004;44:389-400.

Thomson JJ, Parent W. Rights, restitution, and risk: essays, in moral theory. 1986.

Koenigs M, Young L, Adolphs R, Tranel D, Cushman F, Hauser M. Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgments. Nature. 2007;446:908-11.

Koenigs E, Muccioli M, Ladavas E, di Pellegrino G. Selective deficit in personal moral judgment following damage to ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2007;2:84-92.

Moretto G, Ladavas E, Mattioli F, di Pellegrino G. A psychophysiological investigation of moral judgment after ventromedial prefrontal damage. J Cogn Neurosci. 2010;22:1888-99.

Mendez MF, Anderson E, Shapira JS. An investigation of moral judgment in frontotemporal dementia. Cogn Behav Neurol. 2005;18:193-7.

Koenigs M, Kruepke M, Zeier J, Newman JP. Utilitarian moral judgment in psychopathy. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2012;7:708-14.

Cima M, Tonnaer F, Hauser MD. Psychopaths know right from wrong but don’t care. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2010;5:59-67.

Kahane G, Everett JAC, Earp BD, Farias M, Savulescu J. ‘Utilitarian’ judgments in sacrificial moral dilemmas do not reflect impartial concern for the greater good. Cognition. 2015;134:193-209.

Laakasuo M, Sundvall J. Are utilitarian/deontological preferences unidimensional?. Front Psychol. 2016;7:1-18.

Prinz J. Is morality innate?. Moral psychology. 2008:367-406.

Kohlberg L, Candee D. The relationship of moral judgment to moral action. Morality, moral behavior, and moral development. 1984.

Olivera-La Rosa A, Corradi G, Villacampa J, Martí-Vilar M, Arango OE, Rosselló J. Effects of suboptimally presented erotic pictures on moral judgments: a cross-cultural comparison. PloS ONE. 2016;11.

Wang Y, Deng Y, Sui D, Tang YY. Neural correlates of cultural differences in moral decision making: a combined ERP and sLORETA study. Neuroreport. 2014;25:110-6.

Behling O, Law KS. Translating questionnaires and other research instruments: problems and solutions. 2000.

Almeida PR, Seixas MJ, Ferreira-Santos F, Vieira JB, Paiva TO, Moreira PS. Empathic, moral and antisocial outcomes associated with distinct components of psychopathy in healthy individuals: a Triarchic model approach. Pers Individ Dif. 2015;85:205-11.

Kuder GF, Richardson MW. The theory of the estimation of test reliability. Psychometrika. 1937;2:151-60.

Bouwmeester S, Verkoeijen PPJL, Aczel B, Barbosa F, Bègue L, Brañas-Garza P. Registered replication report: Rand, Greene, and Nowak (2012). Perspect Psychol Sci. 2017;12:527-42.

O’Hara RE, Sinnott-Armstrong W, Sinnott-Armstrong NA. Wording effects in moral judgments. Judgm Decis Mak. 2010;5:547-54.

Borg JS, Hynes C, Van Horn J, Grafton S, Sinnott-Armstrong W. Consequences, action, and intention as factors in moral judgments: an fMRI investigation. J Cogn Neurosci. 2006;18:803-17.

Cushman F. Crime and punishment: distinguishing the roles of causal and intentional analyses in moral judgment. Cognition. 2008;108:353-80.

Cikara M, Farnsworth RM, Harris LT, Fiske ST. On the wrong side of the trolley track: neural correlates of relative social valuation. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2010;5:404-13.

Ferreira-Santos F, Sousa P, Mauro C, Paiva TO, Pereira MR. Extending the moral-conventional task: Conceptual and methodological issues in the study of the judgment of moral transgressions. 2012.

Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science. 1981;211:453-8.

Guilford J. Psychometric methods. 1936.

Groth-Marnat . Handbook of psychological assessment. 2009.

Carmona-Perera M, Vilar-Lopez R, Perez-Garcia M, Verdejo-Garcia A. Using moral dilemmas to characterize social decision-making. Clin Neuropsychiatry. 2013;10:95-102.

6169b6f9a953954a6107f833 trends Articles
Links & Downloads
2238-0019 (Electronic)
Trends Psychiatry Psychother ©2024 All rights reserved.

Trends Psychiatry Psychother

Share this page
Page Sections