Objective: This study aimed to examine the effect of professional role activation on the ethical decision‑making of attorneys, as well as the moderating role of their moral foundations.
Method: The research adopted a quantitative approach and was conducted using a quasi‑experimental design with a 2×2 factorial structure. The statistical population consisted of attorneys registered with the Tehran Bar Association, from whom 120 participants were selected through purposive convenience sampling. Inclusion criteria required a minimum of three years of active legal practice and informed willingness to participate. Participants moral foundations were first assessed using the MFQ‑30 questionnaire, after which two professional role frameworks“zealous advocate” and “justice‑oriented advocate”were activated through a role‑priming technique. Following a manipulation‑check procedure, participants responded to five ethical decision‑making scenarios reflecting real‑world situations in legal practice. Data were analyzed using independent t‑tests, simple linear regression, and moderation regression models.
Results: The results indicated that professional role activation had a significant effect on attorneys’ ethical decision‑making (p < 0.05), with the experimental group scoring higher than the control group. Regression analysis showed that the group variable explained approximately 3.5% of the variance in ethical decision‑making. Additionally, none of the five moral foundation dimensions care, fairness, loyalty, authority, and purity displayed a significant interaction effect with professional role activation in predicting ethical decision‑making.
Conclusions: Professional role activation can influence attorneys’ ethical decision‑making; however, the level of their moral foundations did not serve as a significant moderating factor in this relationship.