Citation
Gray, Kurt; MacCormack, Jennifer K.; Henry, Teague; Banks, Emmie; Schein, Chelsea; Armstrong-Carter, Emma L.; Abrams, Samantha; & Muscatell, Keely A. (2022). The Affective Harm Account (AHA) of Moral Judgment: Reconciling Cognition and Affect, Dyadic Morality and Disgust, Harm and Purity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 123(6).Abstract
Moral psychology has long debated whether moral judgment is rooted in harm versus affect. We reconcile this debate with the affective harm account (AHA) of moral judgment. The AHA understands harm as an intuitive perception (i.e., perceived harm), and divides "affect" into two: embodied visceral arousal (i.e., gut feelings) and stimulus-directed affective appraisals (e.g., ratings of disgustingness). The AHA was tested in a randomized, double-blind pharmacological experiment with healthy young adults judging the immorality, harmfulness, and disgustingness of everyday moral scenarios (e.g., lying) and unusual purity scenarios (e.g., sex with a corpse) after receiving either a placebo or theURL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000310Reference Type
Journal ArticleYear Published
2022Journal Title
Journal of Personality and Social PsychologyAuthor(s)
Gray, KurtMacCormack, Jennifer K.
Henry, Teague
Banks, Emmie
Schein, Chelsea
Armstrong-Carter, Emma L.
Abrams, Samantha
Muscatell, Keely A.