CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,698Emotions and Moral BehaviorPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment

Is gratitude a moral affect?

McCullough, Michael E., Kilpatrick, Shelley D., Emmons, Robert A., Larson, David B.·2001·Psychological Bulletin
DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.249
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Gratitude is conceptualized as a moral affect that is analogous to other moral emotions such as empathy and guilt. Gratitude has 3 functions that can be conceptualized as morally relevant: (a) a moral barometer function (i.e., it is a response to the perception that one has been the beneficiary of another person's moral actions); (b) a moral motive function (i.e., it motivates the grateful person to behave prosocially toward the benefactor and other people); and (c) a moral reinforcer function (i.e., when expressed, it encourages benefactors to behave morally in the future). The personality and social factors that are associated with gratitude are also consistent with a conceptualization of gratitude as an affect that is relevant to people's cognitions and behaviors in the moral domain.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.249

Cites

145 of 145 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Gratitude and forgiveness require distinct attributions but share a common, fundamental component of empathy.

    “Gratitude and forgiveness require distinct attributions (Fincham, Paleari, & Regalia, 2002; McCullough, Emmons, & Tsang, 2002) but share a common, fundamental component of empathy (Farrow et al., 2001; Lazarus, 1991; Macaskill, Maltby, & Day, 2002; McCullough, Kilpatrick, Emmons, & Larson, 2001).”

    From Gratitude and forgiveness: convergence and divergence on self-report and informant ratings. (2010) · cites this paper as McCullough, Kilpatrick, Emmons, & Larson, 2001

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
McCullough, M. E., Kilpatrick, S. D., Emmons, R. A., & Larson, D. B.
Affiliations
  • Southern Methodist University (US)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
ORCID
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2001-03
Volume
127
Issue
2
Pages
249-266
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
DOI
10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.249
OpenAlex
W2014281368
Cited by
1,698
References
143
Citations by year
2026: 76 · 2025: 123 · 2024: 103 · 2023: 117 · 2022: 137 · 2021: 131 · 2020: 125 · 2019: 105 · 2018: 72 · 2017: 82 · 2016: 92 · 2015: 92 · 2014: 90 · 2013: 69 · 2012: 48
FWCI
15.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Keywords
gratitude, moral emotions, prosocial behavior, empathy, guilt, moral cognition, personality factors
MeSH terms
Affect, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Models, Psychological, Morals, Motivation, Social Behavior

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