Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36698601›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

Cooperative behavior in the workplace: Empirical evidence from the agent-deed-consequences model of moral judgment.

Sebastian Sattler, Veljko Dubljević, Eric Racine

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sebastian SattlerFaculty of Sociology, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.
Veljko DubljevićPragmatic Health Ethics Research Unit, Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Eric RacinePragmatic Health Ethics Research Unit, Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Moral judgment is of critical importance in the work context because of its implicit or explicit omnipresence in a wide range of work-place practices. The moral aspects of actual behaviors, intentions, and consequences represent areas of deep preoccupation, as exemplified in current corporate social responsibility programs, yet there remain ongoing debates on the best understanding of how such aspects of morality (behaviors, intentions, and consequences) interact. The ADC Model of moral judgment integrates the theoretical insights of three major moral theories (virtue ethics, deontology, and consequentialism) into a single model, which explains how moral judgment occurs in parallel evaluation processes of three different components: the character of a person (Agent-component); their actions (Deed-component); and the consequences brought about in the situation (Consequences-component). The model offers the possibility of overcoming difficulties encountered by single or dual-component theories. Methods: We designed a 2 × 2 × 2-between-subjects design vignette experiment with a Germany-wide sample of employed respondents ( Results: Results showed that the Deed-component affects willingness to cooperate in the work context, which is mediated Discussion: Thereby, the results exemplify the usefulness of the ADC Model in the work context by showing how the distinct components of morality affect moral judgment.

Indexed as

agent-deed-consequences modelcognitive enhancementcooperative behaviordrug misusemoral judgmentsurvey experimentteamworkvignette

Identifiers

PMID36698601
PMCPMC9869171

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.