Modularity in moral judgment by police officers

Abstract

Classical theories of moral judgment (e.g., Piaget, 1965; Kohlberg, 1983) were tested against a modularity hypothesis in police officers. Patrol and investigation officers were compared in a series of experiments using functional measurement in which policemen were asked to make judgments, from both objective and subjective perspectives, about the severity of acts involving verbal or physical aggression. Information in the incidents included justification for the act, intent on the part of the harmdoer and harm caused to the victim. Differences were found between patrol and investigation officers in their responses to moral dilemmas, confirming the importance of professional experience in moral judgment. Individual police officers were also found to switch moral codes according to the perspective from which they made their judgments, lending support to the modularity hypothesis. Findings are discussed in terms of both moral relativity and moral modularity.