IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v21y2024i6p712-d1406051.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When You Think of and Identify Yourself as a Nurse, You Will Become More Deontological and Less Utilitarian

Author

Listed:
  • Mufan Zheng

    (Department of Psychology, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China)

  • Junhua Zhao

    (Department of Psychology, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China)

  • Xielan Zhang

    (Department of Psychology, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China)

Abstract

This study aims to examine how the activation of the role of nursee and professional identification as a nurse can influence moral judgments in terms of deontological and utilitarian inclinations. In Study 1, a priming technique was used to assess the impact of activating the nursing concept on moral reasoning. Participants were randomly assigned to either a nursing prime or neutral prime condition. By using a scrambled-sentence task, participants were prompted to think about nursing-related or neutral thoughts. Following the priming task, participants were asked to respond to 20 moral dilemmas. The process dissociation approach was employed to measure the degree of deontological and utilitarian tendencies in their moral reasoning. In Study 2, participants completed the nursing profession identification scale and the moral orientation scale before engaging in moral judgments similar to those in Study 1. The findings revealed that priming the concept of being a nursee resulted in an increase in deontological clinical inclinations while having no significant effect on utilitarian inclinations. Additionally, a positive correlation was observed between identification with the nursing profession and deontological clinical inclinations, whereas a negative correlation was found with utilitarian inclinations. Deliberation orientation acted as a complete mediator in the relationship between nursing professional identification and deontological tendencies and as a partial mediator for utilitarian tendencies.

Suggested Citation

  • Mufan Zheng & Junhua Zhao & Xielan Zhang, 2024. "When You Think of and Identify Yourself as a Nurse, You Will Become More Deontological and Less Utilitarian," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(6), pages 1-12, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:21:y:2024:i:6:p:712-:d:1406051
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/6/712/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/6/712/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gustav Tinghög & David Andersson & Caroline Bonn & Magnus Johannesson & Michael Kirchler & Lina Koppel & Daniel Västfjäll, 2016. "Intuition and Moral Decision-Making – The Effect of Time Pressure and Cognitive Load on Moral Judgment and Altruistic Behavior," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-19, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Amanda Kvarven & Eirik Strømland & Conny Wollbrant & David Andersson & Magnus Johannesson & Gustav Tinghög & Daniel Västfjäll & Kristian Ove R. Myrseth, 2020. "The intuitive cooperation hypothesis revisited: a meta-analytic examination of effect size and between-study heterogeneity," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(1), pages 26-42, June.
    2. Deck, Cary & Jahedi, Salar & Sheremeta, Roman, 2021. "On the consistency of cognitive load," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    3. Hanna Fromell & Daniele Nosenzo & Trudy Owens, 2020. "Altruism, fast and slow? Evidence from a meta-analysis and a new experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 979-1001, December.
    4. Tajdini, Saeed, 2021. "The effects of the subjective-experiential knowledge gap on consumers’ information search behavior and perceptions of consumption risk," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 66-77.
    5. Bilancini, Ennio & Boncinelli, Leonardo & Guarnieri, Pietro & Spadoni, Lorenzo, 2023. "Delaying and motivating decisions in the (Bully) dictator game," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. David Bilén & Anna Dreber & Magnus Johannesson, 2021. "Are women more generous than men? A meta-analysis," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(1), pages 1-18, September.
    7. Clark H. Warner & Marion Fortin & Tessa Melkonian, 2024. "When Are We More Ethical? A Review and Categorization of the Factors Influencing Dual-Process Ethical Decision-Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 189(4), pages 843-882, February.
    8. Smeele, Nicholas V.R. & Chorus, Caspar G. & Schermer, Maartje H.N. & de Bekker-Grob, Esther W., 2023. "Towards machine learning for moral choice analysis in health economics: A literature review and research agenda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 326(C).
    9. Leon René Sütfeld & Benedikt V Ehinger & Peter König & Gordon Pipa, 2019. "How does the method change what we measure? Comparing virtual reality and text-based surveys for the assessment of moral decisions in traffic dilemmas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, October.
    10. Kvarven, Amanda & Strømland, Eirik & Torsvik, Gaute, 2025. "Estimating Heterogeneity in Intuitive Prosociality," OSF Preprints 4kxsu, Center for Open Science.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:21:y:2024:i:6:p:712-:d:1406051. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.