Tepe Çomoğlu, Beyza

Profile URL
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11779/2767
Name Variants
Tepe, B.
Job Title
Email Address
tepebe@mef.edu.tr
Main Affiliation
04.02. Department of Psychology
Status
Current Staff
Website
https://www.tepemoralitylab.com/
ORCID ID
0000-0003-0246-4995
Scopus Author ID
57189620280
Turkish CoHE Profile ID
Google Scholar ID
WoS Researcher ID
DXW-7218-2022
Files
Beyza Tepe Çomoğlu.jpg (73.92 KB)

Research Topics

Domains
Life SciencesSocial Sciences
Fields
NeuroscienceSocial SciencesPsychologyArts and Humanities
Subfields
Cognitive NeuroscienceSociology and Political ScienceSocial PsychologyReligious studies
Specific Research Areas
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Social and Intergroup Psychology
Cultural Differences and Values
Emotions and Moral Behavior
Islamic Thought and Society Studies

Sustainable Development Goals

NO POVERTY1
NO POVERTY
0
Research Products
ZERO HUNGER2
ZERO HUNGER
0
Research Products
GOOD HEALTH AND WELL-BEING3
GOOD HEALTH AND WELL-BEING
0
Research Products
QUALITY EDUCATION4
QUALITY EDUCATION
0
Research Products
GENDER EQUALITY5
GENDER EQUALITY
0
Research Products
CLEAN WATER AND SANITATION6
CLEAN WATER AND SANITATION
0
Research Products
AFFORDABLE AND CLEAN ENERGY7
AFFORDABLE AND CLEAN ENERGY
0
Research Products
DECENT WORK AND ECONOMIC GROWTH8
DECENT WORK AND ECONOMIC GROWTH
0
Research Products
INDUSTRY, INNOVATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE9
INDUSTRY, INNOVATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
0
Research Products
REDUCED INEQUALITIES10
REDUCED INEQUALITIES
0
Research Products
SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND COMMUNITIES11
SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND COMMUNITIES
0
Research Products
RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION12
RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION
1
Research Products
CLIMATE ACTION13
CLIMATE ACTION
0
Research Products
LIFE BELOW WATER14
LIFE BELOW WATER
0
Research Products
LIFE ON LAND15
LIFE ON LAND
0
Research Products
PEACE, JUSTICE AND STRONG INSTITUTIONS16
PEACE, JUSTICE AND STRONG INSTITUTIONS
1
Research Products
PARTNERSHIPS FOR THE GOALS17
PARTNERSHIPS FOR THE GOALS
0
Research Products
Documents

12

Citations

120

h-index

7

Go to Scopus profile
Documents

15

Citations

128

Go to WoS profile

Publication Collaboration

Affiliation Name Count
Bahçeşehir University 12
Istanbul University 6
Istanbul Bilgi University 4
Işık University 4
MEF University 3
1 / 28
Data obtained from OpenAlex
Scholarly Output

3

Articles

3

Views / Downloads

26/0

Supervised MSc Theses

0

Supervised PhD Theses

0

WoS Citation Count

0

Scopus Citation Count

0

Patents

0

Projects

0

WoS Citations per Publication

0.00

Scopus Citations per Publication

0.00

Open Access Source

0

Supervised Theses

0

JournalCount
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology1
Journal of Environmental Psychology1
Social Psychological and Personality Science1
Current Page: 1 / 1

Scopus Quartile Distribution

Competency Cloud

GCRIS Competency Cloud

Filters

2025 - 20263

Settings

Author of Publication: search.filters.isAuthorOfPublication.9f5fb417-8a1d-4f22-bfed-a8b6604fd0b1

Scholarly Output Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Article
    Moral Framing Effects on Environmental Attitudes: A Conceptual Replication and Extension of Feinberg and Willer (2013)
    (Academic Press Ltd- Elsevier Science Ltd, 2025-12-01) Cavdar, Dilara; Tepe, Beyza; Saribay, S. Adil; Yilmaz, Onurcan
    This study investigates the relationship between moral framing, political orientation, and pro-environmental attitudes, replicating and extending Feinberg and Willer (2013) in a non-Western context. Using a Turkish-speaking sample (N = 699), we examined the effectiveness of care and sanctity-framed messages and the moderating role of actively open-minded thinking (AOT). Our findings partially replicated the original study. Sanctity framing increased pro-environmental attitudes among conservatives, while care framing had no significant effect. Political conservatism was negatively associated with pro-environmental attitudes, confirming prior findings. Exploratory analyses revealed that AOT moderated the effects of sanctity framing on environmental attitudes, with individuals low or moderate in AOT being more responsive. Both care and sanctity frames increased environmental donation, addressing the intention-behavior gap. However, cultural nuances, such as the collectivist orientation of the sample, may have influenced the care frame's ineffectiveness. The study highlights the importance of cultural context in moral framing research and underscores the need for context-specific climate communication strategies.
  • Article
    The Relational Nature of Punishment: Responses To Close Versus Distant Others' Moral Transgressions
    (Sage Publications Inc, 2026-01-28) Tepe, Beyza; Faber, Nadira S.
    How do people respond when a close other, as opposed to a distant other, commits a moral transgression against a third person? Across five preregistered experiments (total N = 2,170), supplemented by pilot studies, we find that people navigate punishment differently depending on relational closeness: they seek less punishment by authorities (institutional punishment) for close others but impose more punishment by themselves (relational punishment) and are more likely to confront the perpetrator directly (Experiments 1-5). Moreover, transgressions of close others elicit both other-blaming and self-blaming emotions, and they prompt individuals to adopt both victim and perpetrator roles (Experiments 2-5). These effects intensify with increasing relational closeness (Experiment 3) and persist across transgressions of varying moral and criminal severity (Experiment 4).
  • Article
    How Does Type of Moral Responsibility Affect the Extent of the Moral Circle? The Influence of Relational Models
    (Sage Publications Inc, 2025-12-09) Sunar, Diane; Cesur, Sevim; Tepe, Beyza; Piyale, Zeynep Ecem; Hill, Charles T.
    The "moral circle" defines entities toward which a person feels moral responsibility. Relational Models Theory (RMT) proposes four basic relational models (communal sharing, authority ranking, equality matching, and market pricing), each with distinct moral motivations. This study applies RMT to define different types of moral responsibility: caring, guiding, obeying/deferring, ensuring equality, or equity. We proposed that the type of moral responsibility may alter a judge's rating of degree of responsibility, affecting the entity's placement within the moral circle. Linear mixed model analyses of responsibility ratings toward various human and other targets across six closeness levels confirmed that relational models significantly affected felt responsibility ratings. Specifically, asking about Equality Matching responsibility (assuring equal rights and treatment) led to higher moral responsibility ratings than other definitions (Communal Sharing, Authority Ranking, Market Pricing), even for negatively judged targets like rapists. The two cultures tested (US and T & uuml;rkiye) differed in average responsibility ratings for various targets, but culture did not interact with Relational Models. Differences in moral inclusiveness are interpreted through relational model characteristics, such as boundedness and rule orientation. In addition to individual, situational, cultural differences, relational models between judge and target also affect extent of the moral circle.