Search

Indians and U.S. Americans view harmful actions as morally wrong, but Indians are more likely than U.S. Americans to perceive helping behaviors as moral imperatives. We utilize this cultural variability in moral belief systems to test whether and how moral considerations influence perceptions of intentionality (as suggested by theories of folk psychology). Four experiments found that Indians attribute more intentionality than U.S. Americans for helpful but not harmful (Studies 1–4) or neutral side effects (Studies 2 and 3). Also, cross-cultural differences in intentionality judgments for positive actions reflect stronger praise motives (Study 3), and stronger devotion to religious beliefs and practices among Hindus (Study 4). These results provide the first direct support for the claim that features of moral belief systems influence folk psychology, and further suggest that the influence is not inherently asymmetrical; motivation to either blame or praise can influence judgments of intentionality.

•Explores an explanatory coherence perspective on moral reasoning.•People reverse engineer descriptive beliefs to support desired moral conclusions.•People ascribe greater culpability to actors for immoral than moral actions.•People assume immoral actions to have negative consequences and moral actions to have positive consequences.•Moral coherence processes blur the distinction between descriptive and prescriptive judgment.