OBJECTIVES We sought to understand how basic competencies in moral reasoning influence the application of private, institutional, and legal rules. HYPOTHESES We predicted that moral appraisals, implicating both outcome-based and mental state reasoning, would shape participants' interpretation of rules and statutes-and asked whether these effects arise differentially under intuitive and reflective reasoning conditions. METHOD In six vignette-based experiments (total N = 2,473; 293 university law students [67% women; age bracket mode: 18-22 years] and 2,180 online workers [60% women; mean age = 31.9 years]), participants considered a wide range of written rules and laws and determined whether a protagonist had violated the rule in question. We manipulated morally relevant aspects of each incident-including the valence of the rule's purpose (Study 1) and of the outcomes that ensued (Studies 2 and 3), as well as the protagonist's accompanying mental state (Studies 5 and 6). In two studies, we simultaneously varied whether participants decided under time pressure or following a forced delay (Studies 4 and 6). RESULTS Moral appraisals of the rule's purpose, the agent's extraneous blameworthiness, and the agent's epistemic state impacted legal determinations and helped to explain participants' departure from rules' literal interpretation. Counter-literal verdicts were stronger under time pressure and were weakened by the opportunity to reflect. CONCLUSIONS Under intuitive reasoning conditions, legal determinations draw on core competencies in moral cognition, such as outcome-based and mental state reasoning. In turn, cognitive reflection dampens these effects on statutory interpretation, allowing text to play a more influential role. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

道德评价指导直觉的法律决定。

目标 我们试图了解道德推理的基本能力如何影响私人、制度和法律规则的应用。假设 我们预测，涉及基于结果和心理状态推理的道德评估会影响参与者对规则和法规的解释，并询问这些影响在直觉和反思推理条件下是否会产生差异。方法 在六项基于小插图的实验中（总人数 = 2,473；293 名大学法学院学生 [67% 为女性；年龄段模式：18-22 岁] 和 2,180 名在线工作者 [60% 为女性；平均年龄 = 31.9 岁]），参与者考虑范围广泛的书面规则和法律，并确定主角是否违反了相关规则。我们操纵了每个事件的道德相关方面——包括规则的效价” 的目的（研究 1）和随之而来的结果（研究 2 和 3），以及主人公伴随的精神状态（研究 5 和 6）。在两项研究中，我们同时改变了参与者是在时间压力下还是在被迫延迟后做出决定（研究 4 和 6）。结果 对规则目的的道德评价、代理人的外来责任和代理人的认知状态影响了法律决定，并有助于解释参与者偏离规则的字面解释。反字面的判决在时间压力下更为强烈，并因反思的机会而减弱。结论 在直觉推理条件下，法律决定利用道德认知的核心能力，例如基于结果和心理状态的推理。反过来，认知反思抑制了这些对法律解释的影响，让文本发挥更大的影响力。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2023 APA，保留所有权利）。