Tamar A. Kreps

Core Values Versus Common Sense: Consequentialist Views Appear Less Rooted in Morality

When a speaker presents an opinion, an important factor in audiences’ reactions is whether the speaker seems to be basing his or her decision on ethical (as opposed to more pragmatic) concerns. We argue that, despite a consequentialist philosophical tradition that views utilitarian consequences as the basis for moral reasoning, lay perceivers think that speakers using arguments based on consequences do not construe the issue as a moral one. Five experiments show that, for both political views (including real State of the Union quotations) and organizational policies, consequentialist views are seen to express less moralization than deontological views, and even sometimes than views presented with no explicit justification. We also demonstrate that perceived moralization in turn affects speakers’ perceived commitment to the issue and authenticity. These findings shed light on lay conceptions of morality and have practical implications for people considering how to express moral opinions publicly.

Hypocritical flip-flop, or courageous evolution?: When leaders change their moral minds.

How do audiences react to leaders who change their opinion after taking moral stances? We propose that people believe moral stances are stronger commitments, compared with pragmatic stances; we therefore explore whether and when audiences believe those commitments can be broken. We find that audiences believe moral commitments should not be broken, and thus that they deride as hypocritical leaders who claim a moral commitment and later change their views. Moreover, they view them as less effective and less worthy of support. Although participants found a moral mind changer especially hypocritical when they disagreed with the new view, the effect persisted even among participants who fully endorsed the new view. We draw these conclusions from analyses and meta-analyses of 15 studies (total N = 5,552), using recent statistical advances to verify the robustness of our findings. In several of our studies, we also test for various possible moderators of these effects; overall we find only 1 promising finding: some evidence that 2 specific justifications for moral mind changes—citing a personally transformative experience, or blaming external circumstances rather than acknowledging opinion change—help moral leaders appear more courageous, but no less hypocritical. Together, our findings demonstrate a lay belief that moral views should be stable over time; they also suggest a downside for leaders in using moral framings.

Real-World Implementation of Infant Behavioral Sleep Interventions: Results of a Parental Survey

Objective To describe parental practices implementing behavioral sleep intervention (BSI) outside a clinical setting. Study design Parents (n = 652), recruited through a Facebook group designed as a peer support group for parents using BSI, completed an online survey about their experience using BSI with their infant or toddler. Results On average, parents implemented BSI when their infant was 5.6 (±2.77) months. Parents most often used modified (49.5%) or unmodified extinction (34.9%), with fewer using a parental presence approach (15.6%). Regardless of BSI type, more parents endorsed “a great deal of stress” during the first night (42.2%) than 1 week later (5.2%). The duration of infant crying was typically greatest the first night (reported by 45%; M = 43 minutes) and was significantly reduced after 1 week (M = 8.54 minutes). Successful implementation of BSI on the first attempt was reported by 83%, with a median and mode of 7 days until completion (79% by 2 weeks). Regardless of BSI type, after intervention parents reported their infant had less difficulty falling asleep, fewer night awakenings, and were more likely to sleep in their room and/or in their own crib/bed. Conclusions The majority of parents report successfully implementing BSI, with significantly reduced infant crying by the end of 1 week and success within 2 weeks. Few differences were found between behavioral approaches.