{"title":"错误与责备判断及其动态:一个道德判断的三输入加工模型。","authors":"Aurore Gaboriaud, Flora Gautheron, Jean-Charles Quinton, Annique Smeding","doi":"10.5334/irsp.868","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In moral psychology, several approaches to moral judgments coexist, with sometimes contradictory results for different types of judgments. In the current research, we combine two views of moral judgment into a novel three-input processing model. As a first empirical test of this model, the present research investigates the influence of these three classic inputs (i.e., intent, outcome, and causality) on wrongness and blame judgments as well as their underlying dynamics. This preregistered experiment (<i>N</i> = 145) re-uses an adapted mouse-tracking paradigm to analyze these influences over time. Results on final judgments replicate the effects of intent, outcome, and causality, as well as partial evidence for their interaction effects. Mouse trajectory analysis further refines these interaction effects, including evidence for differential dynamics for blame versus wrongness judgments. However, this study does not reveal clear differential weight for intent and outcome inputs in blame versus wrongness judgments. Discussion focuses on the evidence supporting but also contradicting the proposed three-input processing model and insists on the importance of distinguishing between final judgments and underlying dynamics.</p>","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":"37 ","pages":"19"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12372680/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wrongness and Blame Judgments and Their Dynamics: Toward a Three-Input Processing Model of Moral Judgment.\",\"authors\":\"Aurore Gaboriaud, Flora Gautheron, Jean-Charles Quinton, Annique Smeding\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/irsp.868\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In moral psychology, several approaches to moral judgments coexist, with sometimes contradictory results for different types of judgments. In the current research, we combine two views of moral judgment into a novel three-input processing model. As a first empirical test of this model, the present research investigates the influence of these three classic inputs (i.e., intent, outcome, and causality) on wrongness and blame judgments as well as their underlying dynamics. This preregistered experiment (<i>N</i> = 145) re-uses an adapted mouse-tracking paradigm to analyze these influences over time. Results on final judgments replicate the effects of intent, outcome, and causality, as well as partial evidence for their interaction effects. Mouse trajectory analysis further refines these interaction effects, including evidence for differential dynamics for blame versus wrongness judgments. However, this study does not reveal clear differential weight for intent and outcome inputs in blame versus wrongness judgments. Discussion focuses on the evidence supporting but also contradicting the proposed three-input processing model and insists on the importance of distinguishing between final judgments and underlying dynamics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45461,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Social Psychology\",\"volume\":\"37 \",\"pages\":\"19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12372680/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.868\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.868","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Wrongness and Blame Judgments and Their Dynamics: Toward a Three-Input Processing Model of Moral Judgment.
In moral psychology, several approaches to moral judgments coexist, with sometimes contradictory results for different types of judgments. In the current research, we combine two views of moral judgment into a novel three-input processing model. As a first empirical test of this model, the present research investigates the influence of these three classic inputs (i.e., intent, outcome, and causality) on wrongness and blame judgments as well as their underlying dynamics. This preregistered experiment (N = 145) re-uses an adapted mouse-tracking paradigm to analyze these influences over time. Results on final judgments replicate the effects of intent, outcome, and causality, as well as partial evidence for their interaction effects. Mouse trajectory analysis further refines these interaction effects, including evidence for differential dynamics for blame versus wrongness judgments. However, this study does not reveal clear differential weight for intent and outcome inputs in blame versus wrongness judgments. Discussion focuses on the evidence supporting but also contradicting the proposed three-input processing model and insists on the importance of distinguishing between final judgments and underlying dynamics.
期刊介绍:
The International Review of Social Psychology (IRSP) is supported by the Association pour la Diffusion de la Recherche Internationale en Psychologie Sociale (A.D.R.I.P.S.). The International Review of Social Psychology publishes empirical research and theoretical notes in all areas of social psychology. Articles are written preferably in English but can also be written in French. The journal was created to reflect research advances in a field where theoretical and fundamental questions inevitably convey social significance and implications. It emphasizes scientific quality of its publications in every area of social psychology. Any kind of research can be considered, as long as the results significantly enhance the understanding of a general social psychological phenomenon and the methodology is appropriate.