One of the most important questions in moral psychology is identifying the underlying process of moral judgement. Recent theories suggest heuristics. The aim of the present study is to examine whether heuristics are included in the process of moral judgement. Two different categories were considered: general (availability, recognition, representativeness) and moral heuristics (tit-for-tat, punishing free-riders in collective actions, incest, luck and effort as cues triggering alternative decision rules, omission). After completing four prestudies for the preparation of materials and methodology, the main part of the study was carried out on a sample of 84 students. They were divided in two experimental groups, differing in the content of the dilemmas. The participants answered eight moral dilemmas for each of aforementioned heuristics, using a computer application. The results confirmed the hypothesis only partially. Out of eight heuristics, only three had an effect on moral judgements – incest and omission heuristic, and tit-for-tat. For the incest heuristic, the difference is significant only for the male subsample. Specifically, sexual intercourse between brother and sister, who are not aware of their kinship is more often found morally unacceptable than between two people who grew up believing they are kin. Not helping someone is approved when the person in need did the same in the last interaction. Moral transgression is more often found morally wrong when it is a result of action rather than omission. It is plausible that people use at least some of the heuristics in moral judgement.