The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Harm, Affect, and the Moral/Conventional Distinction
Abstract
Abstract: The moral/conventional task has been widely used to study the emergence of moral understanding in children and to explore the deficits in moral understanding in clinical populations. Previous studies have indicated that moral transgressions, particularly those in which a victim is harmed, evoke a signature pattern of responses in the moral/conventional task: they are judged to be serious, generalizable and not authority dependent. Moreover, this signature pattern is held to be pan‐cultural and to emerge early in development. However, almost all the evidence for these claims comes from studies using harmful transgressions of the sort that primary school children might commit in the schoolyard. In a study conducted on the Internet, we used a much wider range of harm transgressions, and found that they do not evoke the signature pattern of responses found in studies using only schoolyard transgressions. Paralleling other recent work, our study provides preliminary grounds for skepticism regarding many conclusions drawn from earlier research using the moral/conventional task.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1994) · DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) · Cited by 10,542
A Theory of Justice: Original Edition
Rawls, J. (1971) · doi:10.4159/9780674042605 · Cited by 9,496
DESCARTES' ERROR: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain
Marg, E. (1995) · Optometry and Vision Science · doi:10.1002/j.1538-9235.1995.tb03988.x · Cited by 8,118
Coleman, J. L., & Dworkin, R. M. (1978) · California Law Review · doi:10.2307/3479972 · Cited by 5,460
ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SOCIAL REALITY
(2018) · The Life of a Hunter · doi:10.2307/j.ctt20ks0rb.46 · Cited by 4,788
The construction of social reality
(1995) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-0869 · Cited by 4,674
Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy
Williams, B. (2006) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203969847 · Cited by 2,714
Ralston, C. W. (1992) · Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics · doi:10.1097/00004703-199204000-00011 · Cited by 2,230
How (and where) does moral judgment work?
Greene, J., & Haidt, J. (2002) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(02)02011-9 · Cited by 1,945
Affect, culture, and morality, or is it wrong to eat your dog?
Haidt, J., Koller, S. H., & Dias, M. G. (1993) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.65.4.613 · Cited by 1,700
Cited by
Rai, T. S., & Fiske, A. P. (2011) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0021867 · Cited by 887
Haidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2008) · The Innate Mind, Volume 3 · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195332834.003.0019 · Cited by 650
Doris, J. M., & The Moral Psychology Research Group (2010) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199582143.001.0001 · Cited by 227
Making Change: Norm-Based Strategies for Institutional Change to Address Intractable Problems
Raymond, L., Weldon, S. L., Kelly, D., Arriaga, X. B., & Clark, A. M. (2014) · Political Research Quarterly · doi:10.1177/1065912913510786 · Cited by 75
Self-citationTuriel, E., & Dahl, A. (2019) · The Normative Animal? · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190846466.003.0010 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- KELLY, D., STICH, S., HALEY, K. J., ENG, S. J., & FESSLER, D. M. T.
- Venue
- Mind & Language
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-03-23
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 117-131
- ISSN
- 0268-1064 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-0017
- OpenAlex
- W2075955568
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 43
- FWCI
- 10.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Harm, Affect, and the Moral/Conventional Distinction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2007.00302.x
- The paper
- KELLY, D., STICH, S., HALEY, K. J., ENG, S. J., & FESSLER, D. M. T. (2007). Harm, Affect, and the Moral/Conventional Distinction. Mind & Language. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2007.00302.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
