Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Comparison of the study designs.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Table of correlations for main variables (Study 1).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 1.

Mean moral character judgments as a function of participant’s gender and act (Study 1).

Note. Higher scores indicate better moral character judgments. The error bars represent one standard error.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Mean punishment judgments as a function of participant’s gender and act (Study 1).

Note. Higher scores indicate more severe punishment judgments. The error bars represent one standard error.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Mean competence judgments as a function of participant’s gender and act.

Note. Higher scores indicate better competence judgments. The error bars represent one standard error.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Model 8 for the moderated mediation of the act’s effect on punishment intentions through moral judgments, moderated by gender.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 3.

Table of correlations for main variables (Study 2).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 5.

Mean moral character judgments as a function of participant’s gender and act (Study 2).

Note. Higher scores indicate better moral character judgments. The error bars represent one standard error.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Mean punishment judgments as a function of participant’s gender and act (Study 2).

Note. Higher scores indicate more severe punishment judgments. The error bars represent one standard error.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Model 5 for the moderated mediation of the effect of the act on moral judgments through moral rationalization, moderated by gender.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Model 8 for the moderated mediation of the effect of the act on moral judgments through moral decoupling, moderated by context.

More »

Fig 8 Expand