In two replication attempts, procedural priming of a high construal mindset ("why" condition) unexpectedly led to less harsh judgment of moral transgressions compared to priming of a low construal mindset ("how" condition). Eyal, Liberman, and Trope (EL&T, 2014) proposed the mechanism that explained these findings, and obtained some supporting data. We expand on it by testing the mechanism on virtuous acts instead of on moral transgressions. We conclude by discussing the need to re-evaluate the procedures in the context of specific studies.
TY - JOUR
AU - Žeželj, Iris
AU - Jokić, Biljana
PY - 2014
UR - http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1810
AB - In two replication attempts, procedural priming of a high construal mindset ("why" condition) unexpectedly led to less harsh judgment of moral transgressions compared to priming of a low construal mindset ("how" condition). Eyal, Liberman, and Trope (EL&T, 2014) proposed the mechanism that explained these findings, and obtained some supporting data. We expand on it by testing the mechanism on virtuous acts instead of on moral transgressions. We conclude by discussing the need to re-evaluate the procedures in the context of specific studies.
PB - Hogrefe & Huber Publishers, Gottingen
T2 - Social Psychology
T1 - A Rejoinder to Comments by Eyal, Liberman, & Trope and Gong & Medin
EP - 334
IS - 4
SP - 332
VL - 45
UR - https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_1810
ER -
@article{
author = "Žeželj, Iris and Jokić, Biljana",
year = "2014",
abstract = "In two replication attempts, procedural priming of a high construal mindset ("why" condition) unexpectedly led to less harsh judgment of moral transgressions compared to priming of a low construal mindset ("how" condition). Eyal, Liberman, and Trope (EL&T, 2014) proposed the mechanism that explained these findings, and obtained some supporting data. We expand on it by testing the mechanism on virtuous acts instead of on moral transgressions. We conclude by discussing the need to re-evaluate the procedures in the context of specific studies.",
publisher = "Hogrefe & Huber Publishers, Gottingen",
journal = "Social Psychology",
title = "A Rejoinder to Comments by Eyal, Liberman, & Trope and Gong & Medin",
pages = "334-332",
number = "4",
volume = "45",
url = "https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_1810"
}
Žeželj, I.,& Jokić, B.. (2014). A Rejoinder to Comments by Eyal, Liberman, & Trope and Gong & Medin. in Social Psychology
Hogrefe & Huber Publishers, Gottingen., 45(4), 332-334.
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_1810
Žeželj I, Jokić B. A Rejoinder to Comments by Eyal, Liberman, & Trope and Gong & Medin. in Social Psychology. 2014;45(4):332-334.
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_1810 .
Žeželj, Iris, Jokić, Biljana, "A Rejoinder to Comments by Eyal, Liberman, & Trope and Gong & Medin" in Social Psychology, 45, no. 4 (2014):332-334,
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_1810 .
