Abstract
The article presents an investigation of the effect of situational mitigators on moral evaluations of and advocated sanctions for hypothetical behaviors involving criminal, civil, and constitutional law issues and the relationship between cognitive moral development and the impact of the situational mitigators. We found that situational mitigators did have an impact on moral evaluations, particularly for the civil and constitutional law items. Respondents operating at the Principled Level of cognitive moral development consistently were the least likely to have their moral evaluations and advocated sanctions changed by the situational mitigators. Respondents operating at the Preconventional and Conventional Level were not markedly different in the propensity to alter their moral evaluations but the Conventional Respondents were more likely to change their advocated sanctions.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
