These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
2. Immoral Professors and Malfunctioning Tools: Counterfactual Relevance Accounts Explain the Effect of Norm Violations on Causal Selection. Kominsky JF; Phillips J Cogn Sci; 2019 Nov; 43(11):e12792. PubMed ID: 31742757 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The role of prescriptive norms and knowledge in children's and adults' causal selection. Samland J; Josephs M; Waldmann MR; Rakoczy H J Exp Psychol Gen; 2016 Feb; 145(2):125-30. PubMed ID: 26726914 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. How causal structure, causal strength, and foreseeability affect moral judgments. Engelmann N; Waldmann MR Cognition; 2022 Sep; 226():105167. PubMed ID: 35660345 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. An interaction effect of norm violations on causal judgment. Gill M; Kominsky JF; Icard TF; Knobe J Cognition; 2022 Nov; 228():105183. PubMed ID: 35830782 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Norm status, rather than norm type or blameworthiness, results in the side-effect effect. Lin Z; Yu J; Zhu L Psych J; 2019 Dec; 8(4):513-519. PubMed ID: 31144460 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The good, the bad, and the timely: how temporal order and moral judgment influence causal selection. Reuter K; Kirfel L; van Riel R; Barlassina L Front Psychol; 2014; 5():1336. PubMed ID: 25477851 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Norms Affect Prospective Causal Judgments. Henne P; O'Neill K; Bello P; Khemlani S; De Brigard F Cogn Sci; 2021 Jan; 45(1):e12931. PubMed ID: 33415814 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Manipulating Morality: Third-Party Intentions Alter Moral Judgments by Changing Causal Reasoning. Phillips J; Shaw A Cogn Sci; 2015 Aug; 39(6):1320-47. PubMed ID: 25382593 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. What matters when judging intentionality-moral content or normative status? Testing the rational scientist model of the side-effect. Papadopoulos C; Hayes BK Psychon Bull Rev; 2018 Jun; 25(3):1170-1177. PubMed ID: 28508353 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Children protest moral and conventional violations more when they believe actions are freely chosen. Josephs M; Kushnir T; Gräfenhain M; Rakoczy H J Exp Child Psychol; 2016 Jan; 141():247-55. PubMed ID: 26341742 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Blame, not ability, impacts moral "ought" judgments for impossible actions: Toward an empirical refutation of "ought" implies "can". Chituc V; Henne P; Sinnott-Armstrong W; De Brigard F Cognition; 2016 May; 150():20-5. PubMed ID: 26848732 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. How Much Is Enough? The Relationship Between Prosocial Effort and Moral Character Judgments. Berry Z; Lucas BJ Pers Soc Psychol Bull; 2024 May; 50(5):659-678. PubMed ID: 36575959 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. So It Is, So It Shall Be: Group Regularities License Children's Prescriptive Judgments. Roberts SO; Gelman SA; Ho AK Cogn Sci; 2017 Apr; 41 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):576-600. PubMed ID: 27914116 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The role of a "common is moral" heuristic in the stability and change of moral norms. Lindström B; Jangard S; Selbing I; Olsson A J Exp Psychol Gen; 2018 Feb; 147(2):228-242. PubMed ID: 28891657 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]