Priming Moral Identity: Process-Level Shifts in Moral Judgement Using the CNI Model

Cox, L., Kirby, A., Dennard, C., & Eichas, K. (2026, March).

Overview

This study examines whether priming moral identity temporarily shifts the underlying processes of moral judgement. Specifically, it asks: Does increasing the accessibility of the moral self-concept influence sensitivity to moral norms, consequences, or general inaction in moral dilemmas, and is this effect moderated by the centrality of moral identity?

Poster

View Poster PDF Poster

References

View References PDF

  • Aquino, K., Freeman, D., Reed, A., Lim, V. K. G., & Felps, W. (2009). Testing a social-cognitive model of moral behavior: The interactive influence of situations and moral identity centrality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(1), 123–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015406
  • Aquino, K., & Reed, A. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423–1440. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1423
  • Aquino, K., Reed, A., Thau, S., & Freeman, D. (2007). A grotesque and dark beauty: How moral identity and mechanisms of moral disengagement influence cognitive and emotional reactions to war. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(3), 385–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.013
  • Athanassoulis, N. (n.d.). Virtue Ethics. In Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved February 26, 2026, from https://iep.utm.edu/virtue/
  • Bentham, J. (1789). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Clarendon Press.
  • Blasi, A. (1984). Its role in moral functioning. In W. Kurtines & J. Gewirtz (Eds.), Moral development: Fundamental research in moral development (Vol. 2, pp. 128–139). Wiley.
  • Bostyn, D. H., Sevenhant, S., & Roets, A. (2018). Of Mice, Men, and Trolleys: Hypothetical Judgment Versus Real-Life Behavior in Trolley-Style Moral Dilemmas. Psychological Science, 29(7), 1084–1093. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617752640
  • Conway, P., & Gawronski, B. (2013). Deontological and utilitarian inclinations in moral decision making: A process dissociation approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(2), 216–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031021
  • Gawronski, B., Armstrong, J., Conway, P., Friesdorf, R., & Hütter, M. (2017). Consequences, norms, and generalized inaction in moral dilemmas: The CNI model of moral decision-making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(3), 343–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000086
  • Gawronski, B., & Beer, J. S. (2016). What makes moral dilemma judgments “utilitarian” or “deontological”? Social Neuroscience, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2016.1248787
  • Gawronski, B., & Ng, N. L. (2025). Beyond Trolleyology: The CNI Model of Moral-Dilemma Responses. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 29(1), 32–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683241234114
  • Greene, J. D., Nystrom, L. E., Engell, A. D., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). The Neural Bases of Cognitive Conflict and Control in Moral Judgment. Neuron, 44(2), 389–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2004.09.027
  • Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI Investigation of Emotional Engagement in Moral Judgment. Science, 293(5537), 2105–2108. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1062872
  • Kahane, G. (2015). Sidetracked by trolleys: Why sacrificial moral dilemmas tell us little (or nothing) about utilitarian judgment. Social Neuroscience, 10(5), 551–560. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2015.1023400
  • Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals.
  • Körner, A., Deutsch, R., & Gawronski, B. (2020). Using the CNI Model to Investigate Individual Differences in Moral Dilemma Judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(9), 1392–1407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220907203
  • Thomson, J. (1984). The trolley problem. Yale Law Journal, 94, 1395–1425.
  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases: Biases in judgments reveal some heuristics of thinking under uncertainty. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124