Empirical Investigation of Moral Intuition Across Cultures and Contexts

Thesis Abstract

This study addresses the cross-cultural variability and contextual modulation of moral intuition, a phenomenon central to moral psychology and normative ethics, by examining how intuitive moral judgments are shaped by cultural norms and situational content. The aim is to identify patterns of equivalence and divergence in moral intuitions across diverse cultures and everyday contexts, and to assess the predictive roles of moral foundations, cultural tightness–looseness, and contextual framings on intuitive judgments. Specific objectives include (1) mapping the base-rate of deontological versus utilitarian intuitions across five culturally distinct regions (East Asia, South Asia, Africa, Western Europe, and North America) in response to a standardized set of moral dilemmas; (2) evaluating the moderating effects of cultural variables (moral foundations, collectivism-individualism, and normative conformity) on intuition strength; (3) testing the applicability of dual-process and virtue ethics-informed accounts in explaining context-driven shifts in intuition; and (4) integrating qualitative accounts of participants’ rationales to illuminate underlying cognitive and affective processes. The methodological design is a cross-national, mixed-methods study combining large-scale quantitative surveys with targeted qualitative interviews. The population encompasses adults aged 18–65 recruited from five culturally stratified urban centers via stratified random sampling. A total of 2,500 participants (500 per region) will complete an online battery including culturally adapted moral dilemmas (thereby ensuring cross-cultural equivalence through back-translation and pilot testing), established scales on moral foundations (Moral Foundations Questionnaire), and measures of cultural variables (Hofstede-inspired indices and cultural tightness-looseness). The data collection instruments will include three categories (i) moral intuition elicitation tasks presenting dilemmas that vary in sensational content, outcome probabilities, and moral salience; (ii) self-report scales assessing perceived moral responsibility, emotions (guilt, disgust, empathy), and perceived norms; (iii) semi-structured interviews with a purposive sub-sample of 60 participants (12 per region) to extract nuanced rationales. Quantitative analyses will employ hierarchical linear modeling to examine cross-level effects of region-level cultural indicators on individual intuitive judgments, multiple regression to test the predictive power of moral foundations and cultural variables, and repeated-measures ANOVA to assess context effects across dilemma types. Structural equation modeling will be used to compare dual-process and virtue-ethical theoretical models in accounting for intuitive outcomes, with model fit indices guiding theory selection. The qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic analysis to identify recurring justificatory themes, cognitive strategies, and affective responses, with triangulation performed against quantitative findings to enhance interpretive validity. Expected findings include robust cross-cultural commonalities in core deontological intuitions for harm and fairness violations, alongside meaningful cross-cultural variations in utilitarian leanings when personal involvement or perceived fairness is highlighted. It is anticipated that collectivist and norm-conformist orientations will amplify intuitive adherence to community-benefit rationales in collectivist regions, whereas Western individualist contexts may show greater tolerance for utilitarian justifications under high-risk or high-empathy conditions. The study expects that contextual framing—framed vs. non-framed dilemmas, perceived social endorsement, and perceived consequences—will systematically modulate intuitive responses, supporting a dual-process account that integrates affective fast thinking with deliberative slow reasoning in culturally contingent ways. The study contributes to knowledge by providing empirical evidence on how culture and context shape moral intuition, testing the boundary conditions of established theories in moral psychology, and offering a culturally nuanced integration of dual-process and virtue ethics perspectives. The findings have implications for cross-cultural ethics education, policy dialogues in multinational organizations, and the design of culturally sensitive moral deliberation frameworks. The conclusion will emphasize that moral intuition is not monolithic but dynamically shaped by cultural norms and situational cues, and recommendations will focus on refining cross-cultural ethical communication, developing culturally aware moral assessment tools, and guiding future research toward longitudinal designs that capture evolving moral intuitions in a rapidly globalizing world.