Examining the unfolding of moral decisions across time using the reach-to-touch paradigm

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Samantha Parker, Matthew Finkbeiner
{"title":"Examining the unfolding of moral decisions across time using the reach-to-touch paradigm","authors":"Samantha Parker, Matthew Finkbeiner","doi":"10.1080/13546783.2019.1601640","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Recent theories of decision making are characterised by a growing emphasis on understanding the cognitive mechanisms that produce decisions. This has seen a growth in methods that allow for the continuous collection of data during reasoning. Current applications of these methods to complex decision making have been limited in their ability to examine the dynamics of responding across time. In the current study we address this issue by examining the online dynamics of moral decisions. Participants were required to respond to moral dilemmas that differed according to harm or intention by reaching out and touching one of two response panels. Utilitarian and deontological responses to personal moral dilemmas were found to differ across time. Utilitarian decisions did not emerge more slowly overall, but rather emerged across a wider (less consistent) time period. Importantly, this result did not generalise to a set of standardized moral scenarios. Taken together these findings highlight how dilemma-specific variables can significantly influence moral reasoning and emphasize the importance of using well controlled stimuli together with a measure capable of examining decisions as they unfold over time.","PeriodicalId":47270,"journal":{"name":"Thinking & Reasoning","volume":"243 1","pages":"218 - 253"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thinking & Reasoning","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2019.1601640","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Recent theories of decision making are characterised by a growing emphasis on understanding the cognitive mechanisms that produce decisions. This has seen a growth in methods that allow for the continuous collection of data during reasoning. Current applications of these methods to complex decision making have been limited in their ability to examine the dynamics of responding across time. In the current study we address this issue by examining the online dynamics of moral decisions. Participants were required to respond to moral dilemmas that differed according to harm or intention by reaching out and touching one of two response panels. Utilitarian and deontological responses to personal moral dilemmas were found to differ across time. Utilitarian decisions did not emerge more slowly overall, but rather emerged across a wider (less consistent) time period. Importantly, this result did not generalise to a set of standardized moral scenarios. Taken together these findings highlight how dilemma-specific variables can significantly influence moral reasoning and emphasize the importance of using well controlled stimuli together with a measure capable of examining decisions as they unfold over time.
使用伸手可触的范式检查道德决策在时间上的展开
最近的决策理论的特点是越来越强调理解产生决策的认知机制。这使得在推理过程中不断收集数据的方法得到了发展。目前,这些方法在复杂决策中的应用,在检查跨时间响应动态的能力方面受到了限制。在当前的研究中,我们通过检查道德决策的在线动态来解决这个问题。参与者被要求对不同伤害或意图的道德困境做出反应,他们需要伸出手去触摸两个反应面板中的一个。功利主义和义务论对个人道德困境的反应随着时间的推移而不同。总体而言,功利主义决策并没有出现得更慢,而是出现在更广泛(不太一致)的时间段内。重要的是,这个结果并没有推广到一组标准化的道德场景。综上所述,这些发现强调了困境特定变量如何显著影响道德推理,并强调了使用控制良好的刺激以及能够随着时间的推移检查决策的措施的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Thinking & Reasoning
Thinking & Reasoning PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
11.50%
发文量
25
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信