Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comment
. 2016 Apr 26;113(17):4688-93.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1522070113. Epub 2016 Mar 28.

Small-scale societies exhibit fundamental variation in the role of intentions in moral judgment

H Clark Barrett  1 , Alexander Bolyanatz  2 , Alyssa N Crittenden  3 , Daniel M T Fessler  4 , Simon Fitzpatrick  5 , Michael Gurven  6 , Joseph Henrich  7 , Martin Kanovsky  8 , Geoff Kushnick  9 , Anne Pisor  6 , Brooke A Scelza  4 , Stephen Stich  10 , Chris von Rueden  11 , Wanying Zhao  12 , Stephen Laurence  13
Affiliations
Comment

Small-scale societies exhibit fundamental variation in the role of intentions in moral judgment

H Clark Barrett et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. .

Abstract

Intent and mitigating circumstances play a central role in moral and legal assessments in large-scale industrialized societies. Although these features of moral assessment are widely assumed to be universal, to date, they have only been studied in a narrow range of societies. We show that there is substantial cross-cultural variation among eight traditional small-scale societies (ranging from hunter-gatherer to pastoralist to horticulturalist) and two Western societies (one urban, one rural) in the extent to which intent and mitigating circumstances influence moral judgments. Although participants in all societies took such factors into account to some degree, they did so to very different extents, varying in both the types of considerations taken into account and the types of violations to which such considerations were applied. The particular patterns of assessment characteristic of large-scale industrialized societies may thus reflect relatively recently culturally evolved norms rather than inherent features of human moral judgment.

Keywords: cognition; culture; human universals; intentions; morality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Study populations and sample characteristics.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Intentions Bank: summaries of effects of High- vs. Low-Intent manipulation across societies (A and B) and scenarios (C). (A) Mean difference between High- and Low-Intent conditions for three different judgment variables (Badness, Punishment, Reputation). Societies are shown in ascending order of mean difference between High and Low Intent. (B) Mean severity of judgments for High-Intent and Low-Intent conditions, question items pooled (Badness, Punishment, Reputation). Societies are shown in descending order of mean severity of judgment, High and Low Intent pooled. (C) Mean severity of judgments by Scenario for High- vs. Low-Intent conditions, societies pooled. Scenarios are shown in descending order of mean severity of judgment, High and Low Intent pooled. All judgments on a five-point scale, +2 to −2: +2, very bad; 0, neutral; −2, very good. Bars indicate 95% CI. n = 322.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Intentions Bank: interactions between Society, Scenario, and High- vs. Low-Intent manipulation. Points show mean severity of moral judgments (Badness, Punishment, Reputation) on a five-point scale, +2 to −2: +2, very bad; 0, neutral; −2, very good. Bars indicate 95% CI. n = 322. Scenarios ordered Left to Right in descending order of effect size of amount of variance contributed to effects of High vs. Low Intent on moral judgments across societies.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.
Mean judgments of severity of Victim Outcome and Victim Reaction by Scenario, pooled across societies. Bars indicate 95% CI. n = 322.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.
Mitigating Factors Bank: effects of mitigating factors across societies. Bars show mean severity of judgments for six mitigating factors conditions, question items pooled (Badness, Punishment, Reputation). Societies are shown in descending order of mean severity of judgment (across mitigating factors), and mitigating factors are shown in descending order of mean severity of judgment (across societies). All judgments on a five-point scale, +2 to −2: +2, very bad; 0, neutral; −2, very good. Bars indicate 95% CI. n = 322.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

  • Moral status of accidents.
    Saxe R. Saxe R. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Apr 26;113(17):4555-7. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1604154113. Epub 2016 Apr 14. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016. PMID: 27078109 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Comment on

  • Moral status of accidents.
    Saxe R. Saxe R. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Apr 26;113(17):4555-7. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1604154113. Epub 2016 Apr 14. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016. PMID: 27078109 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Zigon J. Morality: An Anthropological Perspective. Berg; New York: 2008.
    1. Young L, Cushman F, Hauser M, Saxe R. The neural basis of the interaction between theory of mind and moral judgment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104(20):8235–8240. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Young L, Saxe R. When ignorance is no excuse: Different roles for intent across moral domains. Cognition. 2011;120(2):202–214. - PubMed
    1. Mikhail J. Elements of Moral Cognition: Rawls’ Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment. Cambridge Univ Press; New York: 2011.
    1. Krams I, Kokko H, Vrublevska J, Āboliņš-Ābols M, Krama T, Rantala MJ. The excuse principle can maintain cooperation through forgivable defection in the Prisoner's Dilemma game. Proc R Soc London Ser B. 2013;280(1766):20131475. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types