Title Deontičko rasuđivanje moralnim sadržajem Title (english) Deontic reasoning of moral content Author Mislav Sudić Mentor Pavle Valerjev (mentor)Mentor Josip Ćirić (komentor)Committee member Ana Proroković (predsjednik povjerenstva)Committee member Pavle Valerjev (član povjerenstva)Committee member Andrea Tokić (član povjerenstva)Granter University of Zadar Defense date and country 2017-09-25, Croatia Scientific / art field, SOCIAL SCIENCES Abstract Deontička logika pruţa koristan lingvistički i logički okvir za istraživanje kognitivnih procesa pri moralnom rasuđivanju. Cilj ovog istraživanja je provjeriti kako različiti sadržaji i tipovi pravila, te dileme koje oni induciraju (3x2x2 zavisni eksperimentalni dizajn) utječu na brzinu i točnost njihovog procesiranja. U tu svrhu dizajnirana je posebna eksperimentalna procedura, vrsta zadatka deontičkog rasuđivanja, kako bi se izolirao pojedini učinak i interakcija tih varijabli. Ispitanici su preuzeli ulogu nezavisnog suca i, koristeći jasno definirana pravila deontičke logike, procjenjivali u kojem su odnosu (fiktivni) pojedinci i zadana pravila: usklađenost, prekršaj ili supererogatornost (iznad dužnosti). Na temelju tog deontičkog odnosa im je zadatak bio redom ignorirati, kažnjavati ili nagrađivati pojedince. Mjere uspješnosti zadataka su bile vrijeme rješavanja i normativna točnost. Na temelju četiri oblika pravila: (1) obaveza, (2) ne-obaveza, (3) dopuštenje i (4) ne-dopuštenje su formirane dvije nezavisne varijable, tip pravila (obaveza i dopuštenje) i vrsta dileme koju proizvode (kažnjavanje vs. nagrađivanje). Sadržaji su bili moralni, konvencionalni i apstraktni, te su odabrani kombinacijom Parfitove (2016), Haidtove (2012) i Turielove (i sur., 1987) teorije. Utvrđena su sva tri glavna efekta na vrijeme rješavanja i razinu točnosti, te interakcije između tih varijabli. Rezultati ukazuju kako se generalno moralni sadržaji uspješnije procesiraju od konvencionalnih, a konvencionalni uspješnije nego apstraktni. Dileme kažnjavanja su se uglavnom dosljedno lakše razrješavale od dilema nagrađivanja, a obaveze lakše od dopuštenja. Metakognitivna sigurnost je bila veća kod procesiranja moralnih sadržaja, te je pri sve tri vrste sadržaja bila značajno povezana s vremenom rješavanja i točnošću. Moralno rasuđivanje se u ovom istraživanju slično procesiralo neovisno o ostalim varijablama; a obaveze su se najbolje procesirale kada je pravilo konvencionalno. Pronađen je ozbiljan pad u efikasnosti procesiranja pravila koja dopuštaju nepoželjno ponašanje, s napomenom da je moralni sadržaj proizveo kompenzacijski učinak u toj eksperimentalnoj situaciji.
Abstract (english) Deontic logic provides a useful linguistic and logic framework for investigating cognitive processes in moral reasoning. The goal of this study was to find out how different contents and types of rules, as well as dilemmas they induce (3x2x2 within groups design), influence the speed and accuracy of their processing. A special experimental procedure was designed for that purpose, a type of deontic reasoning task, in order to isolate the effects and interactions of those variables. Subjects took on a role of an unbiased judge and, using clearly defined rules of deontic logic, assessed the relationship between (fictional) individuals and a given rule: in line, in violation or supererogatory (beyond the call of duty). On the basis of that deontic relationship their task was to ignore, punish or reward the individuals, respectively. Response time and normative accuracy were used as measures of success. Based on four types of rules: (1) obligation, (2) non-obligation, (3) permission and (4) non-permission two independent variables were formed, a type of law (obligations and permissions) and a type of dilemma they induce (punishing and rewarding). Contents were moral, conventional and abstract and were selected by combining Parfit’s (2016), Haidt’s (2012) and Turiel’s (et al., 1987) theories. All three main effects were found, as well as some interactions. Results indicate that moral content is better processed than conventional, and conventional better than abstract. Punishment dilemmas were more or less consistently easier to solve than reward dilemmas, and obligations easier than permissions. Metacognitive confidence was higher after processing moral rules than abstract rules, and in all three contents it was correlated with response time and accuracy. Moral reasoning in this study processed similarly independent of the other two variables; and obligations where best processed in conventional rules. A serious decline in processing efficiency was detected in rules that allow unwanted behavior, with a note that moral content produced a compensatory effect in that experimental situation.
Keywords
moral
konvencija
deontička logika
metakognitivna sigurnost
Keywords (english)
morality
convention
deontic logic
metacognitive confidence
Language croatian URN:NBN urn:nbn:hr:162:562078 Study programme Title: Psychology Type of resource Text File origin Born digital Access conditions Open access Terms of use Created on 2017-10-13 08:23:20
