Abstract
In 1958 Fritz Heider published his groundbreaking monograph “The psychology of interpersonal relations.” For social psychologists it proved to be a rich source of conceptual ideas and gave rise to some of the “grand” theories of the discipline (e.g. balance theory, theory of justice, and attribution theory). From our perspective, however, the book in its theoretical richness is not yet fully appreciated (Gollan and Witte 2008), especially the 8th chapter with the title “Ought and Values”. For instance, Heider (1958) conceives ‘oughts’ and ‘values’ as people’s culturally shared concepts of what should be attained or done. They refer to what people consider to be “right” or “wrong” and are therefore crucial elements in moral behavior, ethical decision-making, and ethical justification. In our chapter, we adopt Heider’s idea of “rights” and “wrongs” in social contexts and combine it with another of Heider’s notions that has received even more attention: causal attribution. We argue below that this juxtaposition of ideas represents a logical precursor to the concept of prescriptive attribution (Witte and Doll 1995). We will (1) introduce the prescriptive attribution concept by its formal analysis, (2) report two extensions to the model that were included as a consequence of empirical studies, (3) present two measures that offer operationalizations of prescriptive attributions, and finally (4) report empirical results describing specific factors that influence how prescriptive attributions are construed in everyday life
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This is a standardized difference of means. In social sciences a d = 0.50 is a medium effect size, d = 0.20 a small and d = 0.80 a large size.
References
Ewing, A.C. 1953. Ethics. London: English Universities Press.
Gollan, T., and E.H. Witte. 2008. "It was right to do it, because…" Understanding Justifications of Actions as Prescriptive Attributions. Social Psychology 39(3): 189–196.
Gollan, T., A.C. Moser, M.L. Mendes-Teixeira, and V. Brandt. 2011. “It was the right decision because…” – Cultural and personal determinants of ethical justification. Paper presented at the 14th international conference on social dilemmas. July 6–9, 2011, Amsterdam.
Gollenia, M.C. 1999. Ethische Entscheidungen und Rechtfertigungen unter der besonderen Bedingung der sozialen Identität [Ethical decisions and justification and their dependence on social identity]. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Hackel, S. 1995. Zur beruflichen Sozialisation und Identität ost- und westdeutscher Arbeitnehmer [On the professional socialization of employees in East and West Germany]. Dresden: University of Dresden.
Halverscheid, S., and E.H. Witte. 2007. Inhaltsanalytische Modelle zur Identifikation und Analyse von ethischen Rechtfertigungen politischer Gewalt [Identifying and analyzing ethical justification of political violence with content analytic models]. Sicherheit und Frieden 25(2): 85–91.
Halverscheid, S., and E.H. Witte. 2008. Justification of war and terrorism. A comparative case study analyzing ethical positions based on prescriptive attribution theory. Social Psychology 39(1): 26–36.
Heider, F. 1958. The Psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
Heitkamp, I. 2007. Die Entwicklung einer Moderationsmethode für Ethikkommissionen [The development of a moderation technique for ethics committees]. http://www.sub.uni-hamburg.de/opus/volltexte/2007/3313/. Retrieved 3 Jan 2008.
Keltner, D., E.J. Horberg, and C. Oveis. 2006. Emotions as moral intuitions. In Affect in social thinking and behavior, ed. J.P. Forgas, 161–175. New York: Psychology Press.
Maeng, Y-J. 1996. Ethische Grundpositionen als Handlungsrechtfertigung interpersonaler Handlungen: Ein Kulturvergleich zwischen Korea (ROK) und Deutschland [Ethical principles as justification of interpersonal actions: A comparison of the ROK and Germany]. Münster: Waxmann.
Parfit, D. 1984. Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Clarendon.
Schwartz, S.H., G. Melech, A. Lehmann, S. Burgess, M. Harris, and V. Owens. 2001. Extending the cross‐cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 32(5): 519–542.
Tetlock, P.E. 1986. A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50(4): 819–827.
Tetlock, P.E., R.S. Peterson, and J.S. Lerner. 1996. Revising the value pluralism model: Incorporating social content and context postulates. In The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium, vol. 8, ed. M.P. Zanna, C. Seligman, and J.M. Olson, 25–51. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Witte, E.H. 1994. Lehrbuch Sozialpsychologie [Social psychology: A textbook]. Weinheim: Beltz-PVU.
Witte, E.H., and J. Doll. 1995. Soziale Kognition und empirische Ethikforschung: Zur Rechtfertigung von Handlungen [Social cognition and empirical research on ethics: On justification of behaviour]. In Soziale Kognition und empirische Ethikforschung, ed. E.H. Witte, 97–115. Lengerich: Pabst.
Witte, E.H., and I. Heitkamp. 2005. Empirical research on ethics: The influence of social roles on decisions and on their ethical justification. [Hamburger Forschungsbericht zur Sozialpsychologie Nr. 61]. Hamburg: Universität Hamburg, Arbeitsbereich Sozialpsychologie. Repr. in: G.N. Galanis (ed.). Eleftherna. scientific yearbook, 55–83. University of Crete: Department of Psychology.
Witte, E.H., and C. Mölders. 2007. Einkommensteuergesetz: Begründung der vorhandenen Ausnahmetatbestände ethisch bedenklich [Income tax law: Justification of exception rules are questionable]. Wirtschaftspsychologie 2: 65–81.
Witte, E.H., G. Aßmann, and S. Lecher. 1995. Ethik-Kodizes aus Psychologie und Soziologie und ihre Verbindung zu ethischen Grundpositionen [Codices of ethics from psychology and sociology and their relation to the classical positions of ethics]. In Soziale Kognition und empirische Ethikforschung [Social cognition and empirical research on ethics], ed. E.H. Witte, 116–120. Lengerich: Pabst.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Witte, E.H., Gollan, T. (2014). Social Variability in Moral Judgments – Analyzing the Justification of Actions Using the Prescriptive Attribution Concept. In: Christen, M., van Schaik, C., Fischer, J., Huppenbauer, M., Tanner, C. (eds) Empirically Informed Ethics: Morality between Facts and Norms. Library of Ethics and Applied Philosophy, vol 32. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01369-5_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01369-5_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-01368-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-01369-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)