 The moral psychology of continuation decisions: A recipe for moral disengagementGary D. Sherman Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2020, vol. 158, issue C, 36-48 Abstract: To what extent are decision-makers willing to impose costs on others as they pursue their goals? The current investigation tested the hypothesis that the answer depends on whether the decision is an initial decision (whether to start) or a reassessment (whether to continue or switch from a chosen path). Decision-makers should be more likely to experience moral disengagement—to perceive lower moral standards—when contemplating continuing an option relative to choosing that option initially. They will therefore be more willing to impose costs on others for the former than for the latter. In five experiments, which tested hypothetical decisions and real decisions with material stakes, participants were more likely to impose costs on others—and believed ignoring those costs would be more morally acceptable—if they were a side effect of continuation. These results indicate that the moral psychology of continuation is marked by moral disengagement. Keywords: Moral psychology; Morality; Moral disengagement; Status quo; Choice (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:158:y:2020:i:c:p:36-48 DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.02.006 Access Statistics for this article Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes is currently edited by John M. Schaubroeck More articles in Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.