Abstract
This article offers a critical assessment of Cristina Bicchieri and Jon Elster’s recent attempt to distinguish between social, moral, and quasi-moral norms. Although their typologies present interesting differences, they both distinguish types of norms on the basis of the way in which context, and especially other agents’ expectations and behavior, shapes one’s preference to comply with norms. We argue that both typologies should be abandoned because they fail to capture causally relevant features of norms. We nevertheless emphasize that both Bicchieri and Elster correctly draw attention to important and often neglected characteristics of the psychology of norm compliance.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bicchieri C. (2006) The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of social norms. Cambridge University Press, New York
Bicchieri C. (2008) The fragility of fairness: An experimental investigation on the conditional status of pro-social norms. Philosophical Issues 18: 229–248
Camerer C. F. (2003) Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Dana J., Cain D. M., Dawes R. (2006) What you don’t know won’t hurt me: Costly (but quiet) exit in a dictator game. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 100(2): 193–201
Elster J. (1999) Strong feelings: Emotion, addiction, and human behavior. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Elster J. (2007) Explaining social behavior: More nuts and bolts for the social science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Elster J. (2009) Social norms and the explanation of behavior. In: Hedström P., Bearman P. (eds) The oxford handbook of analytical sociology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 195–217
Guala F. (2005) The methodology of experimental economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Haidt J., Joseph C. (2004) Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus 133(4): 55–66
Haley K. J., Fessler D. M. T. (2005) Nobody’s watching? Subtle cues affect generosity in an anonymous economic game. Evolution and Human Behavior 26: 245–256
Heath J. (2008) Following the rules: Practical reasoning and deontic constraint. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Kagel J. H., Kim C., Moser D. (1996) Fairness in ultimatum games with asymmetric information and asymmetric payoffs. Games and Economic Behavior 13: 100–110
Nichols, S. (2002). Norms with feeling: Towards a psychological account of moral judgment. Cognition, 84, 221–236.
Nichols, S. (2004). Sentimental rules: On the natural foundations of moral judgment. New York: Oxford University Press.
Prinz J. (2007) The emotional construction of morals. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Rozin P., Lowery L., Imada S., Haidt J. (1999) The CAD triad hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) and three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50: 703–712
Shweder R. A., Much N. C., Mahapatra M., Park L. (1997) The “big three” of morality (autonomy, community, divinity), and the “big three” explanations of suffering. In: Rozin P., Brandt A. (eds) Morality and Health. Routledge, New York, NY, pp 119–169
Sripada C., Stich S. (2006) A framework for the psychology of norms. In: Carruthers P., Laurence S., Stich S. (eds) The innate mind: Culture and cognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 280–301
Tangney J. P., Stuewig J., Mashek D. J. (2007) Moral emotions and moral behavior. Annual Review of Psychology 58: 345–372
Teroni F., Deonna J. A. (2009) Differentiating shame from guilt. Consciousness and cognition 17: 725–740
Turiel E. (1983) The development of social knowledge. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Xiao E., Bicchieri C. (2009) Do the right thing: But only if others do so. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 22(2): 191–208
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dubreuil, B., Grégoire, JF. Are moral norms distinct from social norms? A critical assessment of Jon Elster and Cristina Bicchieri. Theory Decis 75, 137–152 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-012-9342-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-012-9342-3