Can unintended side effects be intentional? Resolving a controversy over intentionality and morality

  • Guglielmo S
  • Malle B
  • 131

    Readers

    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • 64

    Citations

    Citations of this article.

Abstract

Can an event’s blameworthiness distort whether people see it as intentional? In controversial recent studies, people judged a behavior’s negative side effect intentional even though the agent allegedly had no desire for it to occur. Such a judgment contradicts the standard assumption that desire is a necessary condition of intentionality, and it raises concerns about assessments of intentionality in legal settings. Six studies examined whether blameworthy events distort intentionality judgments. Studies 1 through 4 show that, counter to recent claims, intentionality judgments are systematically guided by variations in the agent’s desire, for moral and nonmoral actions alike. Studies 5 and 6 show that a behavior’s negative side effects are rarely seen as intentional once people are allowed to choose from multiple descriptions of the behavior. Specifically, people distinguish between “knowingly” and “intentionally” bringing about a side effect, even for immoral actions. These studies suggest that intentionality judgments are unaffected by a behavior’s blameworthiness.

Author-supplied keywords

  • bias
  • blame
  • intentionality
  • moral judgment
  • morality
  • praise

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document

Authors

  • Steve Guglielmo

  • Bertram F. Malle

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free