Not all who ponder count costs: Arithmetic reflection predicts utilitarian tendencies, but logical reflection predicts both deontological and utilitarian tendencies

2019/07/10 by Nick Byrd, Paul Conway · 4 citations
Decision Sciences · Neuroscience · Psychology · #Emotions and Moral Behavior #Ethics in Business and Education #Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment

paper · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2019.06.007

openalex publication_date 2019/07/10 · crossref created 2019/07/10 · crossref issued 2019/11/01 · crossref published 2019/11/01 · crossref published-print 2019/11/01 · crossref deposited 2025/09/14 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · crossref indexed 2026/06/02 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/23

Citations

• What makes us think? A three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement
• The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect
• Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach.
• Mortality salience and morality: Thinking about death makes people less utilitarian
• Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment
• Theoretical basis of supply management: theoretical and practical contributions of agency theory
• When Does Model-Based Control Pay Off?
• Of Mice, Men, and Trolleys: Hypothetical Judgment Versus Real-Life Behavior in Trolley-Style Moral Dilemmas
• Philosophical temperament

Cited by

• (How) Do You Regret Killing One to Save Five? Affective and Cognitive Regret Differ After Utilitarian and Deontological Decisions
• Moral Judgment as Categorization (MJAC)
• Great Minds do not Think Alike: Philosophers’ Views Predicted by Reflection, Education, Personality, and Other Demographic Differences
• Dual process theory (moral psychology) [wikipedia]