ABSTRACT
Dual-process theory of moral judgment indicates that moral decision-making is guided by emotional or cognitive processing, competing with each other. While emotional processing overwhelms cognitive processing, individuals preferentially make deontological judgments. Further, while cognitive processing dominates emotional processing, individuals preferentially make utilitarian judgments. This theory predicts that individuals with subclinical depression associated with emotion regulation deficits may deliver more utilitarian judgments. Experiment 1 indicated that higher depressive symptoms predicted utilitarian judgment. However, previous studies have not determined why individuals with subclinical depression make a utilitarian judgment. Thus, Experiment 2 employed the process-dissociation approach, which can separately measure the relative strength of individual deontological and utilitarian inclinations. Deontological inclination (parameter D) was associated with emotional processing, whereas utilitarian inclination (parameter U) was related to cognitive processing. In Experiment 2, the two groups (higher depressive symptoms/minimal depressive symptoms) completed the moral task of the process-dissociation approach to investigate the underlying mechanism. There was a significant interaction effect between the group and parameter of process dissociation. Parameter D in the higher depressive symptoms group was weaker than in the minimal depressive symptoms group. Individuals with subclinical depression bias their utilitarian judgments by making fewer deontological moral judgments.
