Newswise, March 9, 2016 — U.S. presidential candidates Hillary
Clinton and Donald Trump have been criticized for their seeming willingness to
cut corners on core principles when they consider it necessary to make some
progress toward a laudable goal.
While philosophers and voters can debate the pros and cons of
situational ethics, new research from Washington University in St. Louis
suggests that most people stay true to their intrinsic moral colors -- good or
bad -- when dealing with day-to-day choices, regardless of extenuating
circumstances or well-intended reform efforts.
"Our studies provide new and important evidence for the
stability of moral character," said Kathryn Bollich, lead author of two
recent studies exploring how evolving personality traits and competing ethical
quandaries influence moral behavior.
"Using naturally observed, everyday behaviors and
self-reports of moral decision-making, we demonstrate that one’s morality is
stable," Bollich said. "These findings suggest that efforts to modify
moral character may not be so simple. For example, efforts to make a roommate
or romantic partner more helpful and sympathetic, or less condescending and
critical of others, may be met with slow and minimal success."
Bollich, a graduate student in the Department of Psychological
and Brain Sciences in Arts & Sciences, conducted her research as a member of
the Personality Measurement and Development Lab at Washington University.
Joshua Jackson, assistant professor of psychology and lab director, is a joint
co-author on both studies.
While most morality research looks at situations that
influence moral decisions and behaviors, these studies examines whether
individual differences in morality persist across time and across situations.
Both studies demonstrate that a person's moral fiber can be gauged based on
actions that demonstrate their outlook on moral issues, and that these core
levels of morality remain fairly consistent across a range of morally
challenging situations and surroundings.
The first, "Eavesdropping on Character: Assessing
Everyday Moral Behaviors," has been accepted for publication in a forthcoming
issue of the Journal of Research in Personality.
This study analyzes naturally occurring moral behaviors that
were unobtrusively captured by a small digital audio-recorder that the study's
186 participants carried continuously for a weekend or two. The devices
intermittently recorded snippets of conversations and ambient sounds from the
participant's everyday environments; these audio snippets were then rated based
on how much they exemplified moral or immoral behavior.
The study found substantial individual differences in how
often participants engaged in positive moral behaviors, such as showing
affection, gratitude, sympathy, hope or optimism, as well as negative moral
behaviors, such as being sarcastic, condescending, arrogant, critical, blaming
or boastful.
For example, one person expressed gratitude during 17.5
percent of her conversations, and 16 people never expressed gratitude in any of
their recordings. In addition, 10 people never criticized others in any of
their recordings, whereas one person criticized others in 22.2 percent of his
or her conversations.
While these patterns of moral behavior varied widely from
person to person, individuals pattern of moral behavior remained surprisingly
stable over time -- that is, how helpful or grateful someone is one weekend is
similar to how helpful or grateful that person is on a following weekend, the
study found.
Bollich's second study, "When Friends' and Society's
Expectations Collide: A Longitudinal Study of Moral Decision-Making and
Personality across College," was published Jan. 11 in the
multidisciplinary open-access journal PLOS ONE. Findings are based on
longitudinal survey data collected from hundreds of college students across
four years during their freshman and senior years.
This second study found that the students' approach to moral
decision-making across the four years of their college experience also remained
stable over time, with one important change: As students move from freshman
year to senior year, they grow more likely to help a friend even when doing so
requires them to ignore other ethical obligations, such as following the law or
adhering to accepted social norms.
Since young adulthood and college years are an important time
for personality development and maturation, Bollich and colleagues examined the
data to determine if these factors might be driving changes in moral
decision-making and behavior. Surprisingly, their analysis found that increased
maturity and developing personality traits had little or no connection to changes
in moral decision-making.
"Future research should continue to extend our
understanding of moral character by examining how the combination of large life
experiences -- like graduating from college or starting a family -- and smaller
situational influences -- like the personality or moral character of
interaction partners -- may or may not play a role in one's morality and
development. Together, these approaches will help us capture a more complete
picture of morality as it is manifested in everyday life and across the
lifespan," Bollich said.
No comments:
Post a Comment