Date of Award
Fall 11-17-2025
Document Type
Thesis
Publication Status
Version of Record
Submission Date
December 2025
Department
Psychology
College Granting Degree
Charles E. Schmidt College of Science
Department Granting Degree
Psychology
Degree Name
Master of Arts (MA)
Thesis/Dissertation Advisor [Chair]
Robin Vallacher
Abstract
This study examined how political orientation, locus of control, and action identification predict moral reasoning across six dilemmas contrasting consistency and compensation. Participants (N ≈ 245) completed measures of ideological beliefs, perceived control, and action construal. Reliability analyses indicated modest internal consistency for Action Identification (α = .53) and low reliability for Locus of Control (α = .32). The six moral scenarios showed very low reliability (α = .11), indicating they captured diverse judgment domains. Binary logistic regressions revealed that political orientation, particularly its social dimension—was the strongest and most context-dependent predictor of moral choice. Economic conservatism predicted compensatory preferences in college admissions, whereas social conservatism showed opposing effects across dilemmas. Action identification and locus of control demonstrated minimal predictive power. Findings suggest that moral judgment is context-dependent and shaped primarily by ideological rather than cognitive or control-related dispositions.
Recommended Citation
Louramore, Brittney, "CONFLICTING BASES FOR JUDGING ACTION AND ACTORS: THE ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES" (2025). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 204.
https://digitalcommons.fau.edu/etd_general/204