@misc{10481/78091,
year = {2022},
month = {10},
url = {https://hdl.handle.net/10481/78091},
abstract = {A cross-cultural survey experiment revealed a dominant tendency to rely on a rule’s letter over its spirit when deciding which behaviors violate the rule. This tendency varied markedly across (k = 15) countries, owing to variation in the impact of moral appraisals on judgments of rule violation. Compared with laypeople, legal experts were more inclined to disregard their moral evaluations of the acts altogether and consequently exhibited stronger textualist tendencies. Finally, we evaluated a plausible mechanism for the emergence of textualism: in a two-player coordination game, incentives to coordinate in the absence of communication reinforced participants’ adherence to rules’ literal meaning. Together, these studies (total n = 5,794) help clarify the origins and allure of textualism, especially in the law. Within heterogeneous communities in which members diverge in their moral appraisals involving a rule’s purpose, the rule’s literal meaning provides a clear focal point—an identifiable point of agreement enabling coordinated interpretation among citizens, lawmakers, and judges.},
organization = {European Research Council
805498},
organization = {Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
PZ00P1_179912},
organization = {Narodowe Centrum Nauki
2017/25/N/HS5/00944, 2020/36/C/HS5/00111},
organization = {Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación
PID2020-119791RA-I00, RTI2018-098882-B-I00},
publisher = {National Academy of Sciences},
keywords = {Moral judgment},
keywords = {Legal decision making},
keywords = {Coordination},
keywords = {Cross-cultural research},
title = {Coordination and expertise foster legal textualism},
doi = {10.1073/pnas.2206531119},
author = {Rodríguez Hannikainen, Ivar Allan},
}