Mapping perfect and imperfect duties onto hierarchically and partially restrictive trait dimensions

Abstract

Four experiments were performed to test a proposal that hierarchically restrictive and partially restrictive trait dimensions (Reeder & Brewer, 1979) pertaining to morality can be understood in terms of Immanuel Kant's distinction between perfect and imperfect duties. In Experiment 1, subjects simply rated the number of contrary behaviors they would have to observe in order to change a prior expectancy that a target person had particular morality traits. Their responses indicated that positive partially restrictive traits were more difficult to disconfirm than positive hierarchically restrictive traits. In Experiment 2, subjects were presented with scenarios where the type of person, the type of situation, the type of behavior, and the trait of concern were manipulated. Behavior had a greater, and the situation had a lesser, effect on trait attributions for hierarchically than partially restrictive morality dimensions. Experiment 3 demonstrated that differences in trait attributions for the two types of trait dimensions were not due to the implications of contrary behaviors for the frequency with which these behaviors could be expected to be repeated in the future. Finally, Experiment 4 further supported the prediction that situational factors affect trait attributions less for hierarchically than partially restrictive trait dimensions pertaining to morality.

Citation

Trafimow, D. and Trafimow, S. (2001), "Mapping perfect and imperfect duties onto hierarchically and partially restrictive trait dimensions", Dienhart, J., Moberg, D. and Duska, R. (Ed.) The Next Phase of Business Ethics: Integrating Psychology and Ethics (Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations, Vol. 3), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 103-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1529-2096(01)03009-7