Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2007. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 91-95).

Thesis (Ph.D. in Nursing) -- University of Colorado Denver, 2007. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 173-183). Free to UCD affiliates. Online version available via ProQuest Digital Dissertations;

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri--Columbia, 2002. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 76-81). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri--Columbia, 1999. / "May 1999." Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (M.S.) -- University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, 2005. / Vita. Bibliography: 40-46.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2004. / Typescript. Title from title page of source document. Document formatted into pages; contains 71 pages. Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2004. / Typescript. Title from title page of source document. Document formatted into pages; contains 32 pages. Includes Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Alabama at Birmingham, 2007. / Title from first page of PDF file (viewed Oct. 30, 2007). Includes bibliographical references (p. 47-62).

The main aim of this PhD research was to explore the cultural differences in moral judgment, moral behaviour, moral identity, and cultural values between Saudi Arabia and United Kingdom. Furthermore, I was interested in the psychological factors affecting morality in those two cultures. The first study aimed to achieve the following objectives: to understand people’s moral judgment in Saudi Arabia and the UK, to investigate whether and how personality traits and cultural values affect moral judgment in five moral foundations (harm avoidance, justice, ingroup, authority, purity), and to investigate whether personality traits and cultural values are related differently or similarly across Saudi and UK cultures. The findings of the study revealed that Saudi and British participants differed with regard to their foundation-specific moral judgments. Saudi participants were more likely to endorse moral foundations in the domains of intergroup relations, authority, and purity. However, there were no cross-cultural differences in the domains of harm avoidance and justice. Moreover, the results showed that the effect of personality traits and cultural values on morality varied. Harm and fairness foundations were predicted by personality traits while ingroup, authority, purity foundations were predicted by values. The second study investigated whether foundation-related moral behaviour was affected by moral judgment and people’s moral identity in a cross-cultural context comparing adults from the UK and Saudi Arabia. Findings of this study resulted in no cross-cultural differences between the two samples concerning moral judgment in the care and justice foundations. Furthermore, no cultural differences were found between the two samples concerning moral behaviour in the five foundations. In addition, moral identity mediated the relationship between moral judgment and allocations in the dictator game. The third study investigated the relationship between (dis-) honest behaviour, moral judgment and moral identity in two different cultures, namely Saudi Arabia and the UK. It has been found that there are no statistically significant differences in honest behaviour between Saudi Arabia and the UK. Furthermore, deception was not predicted or correlated significantly with any of the five foundation-specific moral judgments across both cultural samples. However, culture moderated the relationship between deception and moral judgment in harm and authority moral foundations. Additionally, moral sensitivity did not mediate the relationship between moral judgments and dishonesty. The forth study explored the link between moral foundation violations (harm, justice, ingroup, authority, and purity) and anger, disgust, sadness, apathy, guilt, contempt, shame, resentment, and embarrassment emotions. Findings showed that the violations of harm, and justice foundations triggered anger and Violations of purity foundation triggered disgust. The results show no cultural differences in the assignments of the violations made by both samples. Saudi and UK participants’ classifications were in agreement with the original classifications of the 40 violations by Graham et al. (2009). However, we found cross-cultural differences in the relationship between emotions and moral foundation violations.

Submitted by Viviane Lima da Cunha (viviane@biblioteca.ufpb.br) on 2016-01-27T13:09:57Z No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivototal.pdf: 2432545 bytes, checksum: b6d8b998b89cb7f5eda90b919294bcd8 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-01-27T13:09:57Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivototal.pdf: 2432545 bytes, checksum: b6d8b998b89cb7f5eda90b919294bcd8 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-04-29 / Facial expressions function as an extremely adaptive non-verbal form of communication. However, there is a debate regarding the universality of emotions. This study aimed to create and carry out a cross-cultural comparison of a Brazilian facial expressions database. Fifteen actors in the city of João Pessoa were instructed to pose expressions of happiness, fear, disgust, sadness, anger, surprise and the neutral face. The sample of the validation study was composed of 242 undergraduate students from João Pessoa/Brazil, Ribeirão Preto/Brazil and Barcelona/Spain. The results show a high recognition rate of expressions in different regions, getting above 80% frequency (happiness, anger, surprise and neutral faces), approximately 70% (disgust), however, below of 45% for fear. Some emotions were differently attributed between locations, but overall there was agreement in the evaluation of judges. The high recognition rates are evidence in favor of the universality hypothesis, but more research is needed. / As expressões faciais funcionam como uma forma de comunicação não verbal extremamente adaptativa. Entretanto, ainda existe um debate em relação a universalidade das emoções. O presente estudo teve como objetivo a composição e a comparação transcultural de um banco de expressões faciais brasileiro. Quinze atores da cidade de João Pessoa representaram as faces de alegria, medo, nojo, tristeza, raiva, surpresa e neutra. O estudo de validação dos estímulos contou com a participação de 242 estudantes universitários de João Pessoa/PB, Ribeirão Preto/SP e Barcelona/Espanha. Os resultados indicaram um alto índice de reconhecimento das expressões nas diferentes regiões, obtendo frequências acima de 80% (faces de alegria, raiva, neutra e surpresa), de aproximadamente 70% (nojo), entretanto, para medo, abaixo de 45%. Algumas emoções foram atribuídas de forma diferenciada entre as localidades, mas no geral houve concordância na avaliação entre juízes. Os altos índices de reconhecimento dão suporte à hipótese da universalidade, contudo mais investigações são necessárias.