Proscriptive versus prescriptive morality: two faces of moral regulation
- PMID: 19254101
- DOI: 10.1037/a0013779
Proscriptive versus prescriptive morality: two faces of moral regulation
Abstract
A distinction is made between two forms of morality on the basis of approach-avoidance differences in self-regulation. Prescriptive morality is sensitive to positive outcomes, activation-based, and focused on what we should do. Proscriptive morality is sensitive to negative outcomes, inhibition-based, and focused on what we should not do. Seven studies profile these two faces of morality, support their distinct motivational underpinnings, and provide evidence of moral asymmetry. Both are well-represented in individuals' moral repertoire and equivalent in terms of moral weight, but proscriptive morality is condemnatory and strict, whereas prescriptive morality is commendatory and not strict. More specifically, in these studies proscriptive morality was perceived as concrete, mandatory, and duty-based, whereas prescriptive morality was perceived as more abstract, discretionary, and based in duty or desire; proscriptive immorality resulted in greater blame, whereas prescriptive morality resulted in greater moral credit. Implications for broader social regulation, including cross-cultural differences and political orientation, are discussed.
Similar articles
-
The Problem of Purity in Moral Psychology.Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2023 Aug;27(3):272-308. doi: 10.1177/10888683221124741. Epub 2022 Oct 31. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2023. PMID: 36314693 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The "shoulds" and "should nots" of moral emotions: a self-regulatory perspective on shame and guilt.Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2010 Feb;36(2):213-24. doi: 10.1177/0146167209356788. Epub 2009 Dec 15. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2010. PMID: 20008966
-
Paradoxical consequences of prohibitions.J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013 Aug;105(2):301-15. doi: 10.1037/a0032278. Epub 2013 Apr 29. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013. PMID: 23627748
-
Moral context matters: a reply to Graham.Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2013 Aug;17(3):242-7. doi: 10.1177/1088868313492021. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2013. PMID: 23861353
-
The Theory of Dyadic Morality: Reinventing Moral Judgment by Redefining Harm.Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2018 Feb;22(1):32-70. doi: 10.1177/1088868317698288. Epub 2017 May 14. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2018. PMID: 28504021 Review.
Cited by
-
Psychological perspectives on divine forgiveness: seeking divine forgiveness.Front Psychol. 2024 Feb 21;15:1256402. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1256402. eCollection 2024. Front Psychol. 2024. PMID: 38455121 Free PMC article.
-
Be a Rascal Among Rascal? The Vicarious Moral Self-Regulation Effect in College Students' Pro-Environmental Behaviors.Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2023 Aug 2;16:2913-2929. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S414341. eCollection 2023. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2023. PMID: 37551394 Free PMC article.
-
Moral contamination: Perceptions of good (but not bad) deeds depend on the ethical history of the actor.Front Psychol. 2023 Jan 19;13:1025214. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1025214. eCollection 2022. Front Psychol. 2023. PMID: 36743620 Free PMC article.
-
Perceived legitimacy can moderate the effect of proscriptive versus prescriptive injunctions on intentions to comply with UK government COVID-19 guidelines and reactance.J Appl Soc Psychol. 2022 Dec 5:10.1111/jasp.12950. doi: 10.1111/jasp.12950. Online ahead of print. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2022. PMID: 36718478 Free PMC article.
-
The Problem of Purity in Moral Psychology.Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2023 Aug;27(3):272-308. doi: 10.1177/10888683221124741. Epub 2022 Oct 31. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2023. PMID: 36314693 Free PMC article. Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials
