Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency
Abstract
Moral agency has dual aspects manifested in both the power to refrain from behaving inhumanely and the proactive power to behave humanely. Moral agency is embedded in a broader socio-cognitive self-theory encompassing affective self-regulatory mechanisms rooted in personal standards linked to self-sanctions. Moral functioning is thus governed by self-reactive selfhood rather than by dispassionate abstract reasoning. The self-regulatory mechanisms governing moral conduct do not come into play unless they are activated and there are many psychosocial mechanisms by which moral self-sanctions are selectively disengaged from inhumane conduct. The moral disengagement may centre on the cognitive restructuring of inhumane conduct into a benign or worthy one by moral justi cation, sanitising language and exonerative social comparison; disavowal of personal agency in the harm one causes by diffusion or displacement of responsibility; disregarding or minimising the injurious effects of one’s actions; and attribution of blame to, and dehumanisation of, those who are victimised. Social cognitive theory adopts an interactionist perspective to morality in which moral actions are the products of the reciprocal interplay of personal and social in uences. Given the many mechanisms for disengaging moral control at both the individual and collective level, civilised life requires, in
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Attribution of blame dimensions of both studies has more appropriate items to adapt to our construct.
“attribution of blame dimensions of both studies has more appropriate items to adapt to our construct”
From Blame or Justification: A Conceptual Model of How Attributions Shape Observers’ Deviant Responses to Abusive Supervision (2026) · cites this paper as Bandura et al., 1996
Bandura et al.'s (1996) moral justification dimension involves justifying a person's engagement in immoral actions in order to serve a morally better cause.
“Bandura et al.’s (1996) Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement Scale for moral justification dimension, involves justifying a person’s engagement in immoral actions in order to serve a morally better cause”
From Blame or Justification: A Conceptual Model of How Attributions Shape Observers’ Deviant Responses to Abusive Supervision (2026) · cites this paper as Bandura et al., 1996
These items do not reflect any attempts to provide an employee's justification of managerial mistreatment in a workplace context.
“these items do not reflect any attempts to provide an employee’s justification of managerial mistreatment in a workplace context.”
From Blame or Justification: A Conceptual Model of How Attributions Shape Observers’ Deviant Responses to Abusive Supervision (2026) · cites this paper as Bandura et al., 1996
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 2,680
- Authors
- Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 1996-08
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 364-374
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2132479067
- Cited by
- 2,680
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 192 · 2025: 202 · 2024: 217 · 2023: 193 · 2022: 225 · 2021: 222 · 2020: 200 · 2019: 153 · 2018: 138 · 2017: 110 · 2016: 120 · 2015: 101 · 2014: 94 · 2013: 84 · 2012: 87
- FWCI
- 3.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- moral disengagement, moral agency, moral self-regulation, moral justification, diffusion of responsibility, dehumanization, blame attribution, social comparison, cognitive restructuring
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review