 By contrast, two recent studies by Berniūnas and his colleagues (2016, 2020) did use Haidt-style transgressions, including eating a pet dog who has been run over, using the national flag to clean the toilet, and defecating in a Buddhist temple. They also followed Haidt in explicitly asking whether anyone was harmed by these actions. But, unlike Haidt, they solicited Turiel-style criterion judgments using questions that cleaved quite closely to those used by Turiel and other social domain theorists. They found that many of the transgressions that the participants themselves characterized as harmless evinced moral rather than conventional criterion judgments.