ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Means to an end: teleological bias in moral reasoning.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
No model to date has integrated findings from teleological explanation with findings from moral reasoning to explore an underlying mechanism of moral cognition. We hypothesize that a preference for teleology, whereby consequences are assumed to be intentional, can explain instances where adults make judgments that seemingly neglect to account for intent. Across two studies, we investigated whether manipulating teleological reasoning influences moral judgment. 291 participants were evaluated in a 2 × 2 experimental design to assess the effects of teleology priming on adults' endorsement of teleological misconceptions and moral judgments. Results provide some evidence that teleological reasoning influences moral judgment, but the findings are limited, context-dependent, and suggest that teleology is unlikely to be a strong influence in the explanation of outcome-based moral judgments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.