Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Horan, H. D.
Right arrow Articles by Kaplan, M. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Horan, H. D.
Right arrow Articles by Kaplan, M. F.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 9, No. 4, 638-645 (1983)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167283094013
© 1983 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Criminal Intent and Consequence Severity

Effects of Moral Reasoning on Punishment

Hope D. Horan

Glenwood State Hospital-School, Glenwood, Iowa

Martin F. Kaplan

Northern Illinois University

Developmental theory identifies progressions in two spheres of moral behavior: the reasoning used in making moral choices in dilemmas and the relative use of intentions and consequences in judging another's actions. Adult subjects selected as high or low in moral reasoning level for moral choices sentenced hypothetical defendants for criminal acts varying in severity of intended outcome and actual consequence. Consequences affected sentencing more, and their effect was equally pronounced for both moral reasoning groups. Subjects with a high level of moral reasoning were influenced more by intention severity than were low-level subjects. Suggested guidelines on the relative importance of intentions and consequences were ignored by subjects. Individual differences in moral reasoning in choices were reflected in usage of intentions in retributive justice, giving partial support to the notion of structural parallelism. Failure of reasoning level to extend to con-sequences was attributed to the intrinsic importance of extent of harm, both legally and psychologically, to criminal punishment. It is suggested that sentencer's moral reasoning level is a potential source of disparities in discretionary punitive decisions.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?