Patterns of judgments and self-estimated behavior when faced against moral dilemmas of the consequentialistic vs. deontological kind: A pilot study analysis

The reliability of the newly constructed Moral Attitude Questionnaire (MAQ) was tested in this Pilot study. MAQ aims to assess individual and cultural differences in moral attitudes and expected behavior on a broad scale, contrasting typically consequentialistic attitudes with typically non-consequentialistic attitudes congruent with common-sense moral. Five representative categories with five stories in each were tested. Attitudes towards the intentional act/foreseen omission doctrine and attitudes towards family partiality could be measured in a decently reliable way. The stories measuring attitudes towards retributive punishment and attitudes towards rational suicide showed mixed inter-correlations. Attitudes towards the moral weight of number of victims could not be measured in a reliable way. Participants did expect themselves to behave more partial than they believe they should from a moral perspective. Male participants seemed to be more partial than female participants on both attitude and expected behavior-level.