Will Incidental Happiness Reduce the Agent’s Moral Norms Sensitivity?

Abstract

Abstract: Previous study demonstrated that the CNI model approach presupposed an agent considers consequences-norms-generalized inaction/action preferences sequentially, which is untenable. We reanalyzed the raw data of the study, in which incidental happiness reduces the agent’s moral norms sensitivity, and then ran a conceptual replication study of the effect. The results demonstrated that the target effect was statistically insignificant. It supports our speculation that the CNI model overestimates the differences between groups on moral sensitivity, thus turning out false positive effects. This effect should be carefully checked in the future, and the limitations of the CNI model should be brought to the forefront.

Key words: moral dilemma, multinomial processing tree, CNI model, CAN algorithm, dual process theory of morality

摘要： 前人研究发现诱发高兴情绪会显著降低人们的道德规范敏感度，但其使用的CNI模型法存在缺陷。为了重新检验该效应，本研究使用对CNI模型法修订后的CAN算法对该效应的原始数据进行了重新分析，并进行了概念性重复研究和跨研究元分析。研究结果均显示，该效应在统计上不显著。结果表明，高兴情绪降低道德规范敏感度的效应，无法排除假阳性的可能。本研究为重新审视该效应，全面认识CNI模型法的贡献与局限提供了实验证据。

关键词: 道德两难, 多项式决策加工树, CNI模型, CAN算法, 道德双加工理论

CLC Number:

B849

LIU Chuanjun, XIE Zhongju, WANG Xingyuan. Will Incidental Happiness Reduce the Agent’s Moral Norms Sensitivity?[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(5): 687-694.

刘传军, 谢忠桔, 王星元. 诱发高兴情绪会降低人们的道德规范敏感度吗？[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(5): 687-694.

References

胡传鹏, 王非, 过继成思, 宋梦迪, 隋洁, 彭凯平. (2016). 心理学研究中的可重复性问题: 从危机到契机. 心理科学进展, 24(9), 1504–1518
刘传军, 廖江群. (2021). 道德困境研究的范式沿革及其理论价值. 心理科学进展, 29(8), 1508–1520
刘传军, 廖江群. (印刷中). 不幸的道德: 运气越差越功利主义. 中国社会心理学评论.
邱林, 郑雪, 王雁飞. (2008). 积极情感消极情感量表(PANAS)的修订. 应用心理学, 14(3), 249–254
文少司, 丁道群. (2015). 情绪如何影响道德判断: 完全差异化的观点. 心理研究, 8(3), 19–29
吴宝沛, 张雷. (2012). 厌恶与道德判断的关系. 心理科学进展, 20(2), 309–316
徐科朋, 杨凌倩, 吴家虹, 薛宏, 张姝玥. (2020). CNI模型在道德决策研究中的应用. 心理科学进展, 28(12), 2102–2113
曾笑雨, 马燚娜. (2020). 多项式模型在道德判断研究中的应用. 科学通报, 65(19), 1912–1921
Baron, J., & Goodwin, G. P. (2020). Consequences, norms, and inaction: A critical analysis. Judgment and Decision Making, 15(3), 421–442.
Białek, M., Paruzel-Czachura, M., & Gawronski, B. (2019). Foreign language effects on moral dilemma judgments: An analysis using the CNI model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 85, 103855, doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103855.
Björklund, F., Haidt, J., & Murphy, S. (2000). Moral dumbfounding: When intuition finds no reason. In Lund psychological reports (Vol. 1, pp. 1–23). Scania, Sweden: Lund University, Department of Psychology.
Chapman, H. A., & Anderson, A. K. (2014). Trait physical disgust is related to moral judgments outside of the purity domain. Emotion, 14(2), 341–348, doi: 10.1037/a0035120.
Chapman, H. A., Kim, D. A., Susskind, J. M., & Anderson, A. K. (2009). In bad taste: Evidence for the oral origins of moral disgust. Science, 323(5918), 1222–1226, doi: 10.1126/science.1165565.
Gawronski, B., Armstrong, J., Conway, P., Friesdorf, R., & Hütter, M. (2017). Consequences, norms, and generalized inaction in moral dilemmas: The CNI model of moral decision-making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(3), 343–376, doi: 10.1037/pspa0000086.
Gawronski, B., & Beer, J. S. (2017). What makes moral dilemma judgments “utilitarian” or “deontological”. Social Neuroscience, 12(6), 626–632.
Gawronski, B., & Brannon, S. M. (2019). What is cognitive consistency, and why does it matter? In E. Harmon-Jones (Ed.), Cognitive dissonance: Reexamining a pivotal theory in psychology (2nd ed., pp. 91–116). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Gawronski, B., Conway, P., Armstrong, J., Friesdorf, R., & Hütter, M. (2018). Effects of incidental emotions on moral dilemma judgments: An analysis using the CNI model. Emotion, 18(7), 989–1008, doi: 10.1037/emo0000399.
Gawronski, B., Conway, P., Hütter, M., Luke, D. M., Armstrong, J., & Friesdorf, R. (2020). On the validity of the CNI model of moral decision-making: Reply to Baron and Goodwin (2020). Judgment and Decision Making, 15(6), 1054–1072.
Greene, J., & Haidt, J. (2002). How (and where) does moral judgment work. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(12), 517–523, doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)02011-9.
Greene, J. D. (2007). Why are VMPFC patients more utilitarian? A dual-process theory of moral judgment explains. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(8), 322–323, doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.06.004.
Greene, J. D. (2009). Dual-process morality and the personal/impersonal distinction: A reply to McGuire, Langdon, Coltheart, and Mackenzie. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(3), 581–584, doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.01.003.
Greene, J. D., Morelli, S. A., Lowenberg, K., Nystrom, L. E., & Cohen, J. D. (2008). Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment. Cognition, 107(3), 1144–1154, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.11.004.
Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293(5537), 2105–2108, doi: 10.1126/science.1062872.
Haidt, J., Rozin, P., Mccauley, C., & Imada, S. (1997). Body, psyche, and culture: The relationship between disgust and morality. Psychology and Developing Societies, 9(1), 107–131, doi: 10.1177/097133369700900105.
Koenigs, M., Young, L., Adolphs, R., Tranel, D., Cushman, F., Hauser, M., & Damasio, A. (2007). Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgements. Nature, 446(7138), 908–911, doi: 10.1038/nature05631.
Körner, A., Deutsch, R., & Gawronski, B. (2020). Using the CNI model to investigate individual differences in moral dilemma judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(9), 1392–1407, doi: 10.1177/0146167220907203.
Landy, J. F., & Goodwin, G. P. (2015). Does incidental disgust amplify moral judgment? A meta-analytic review of experimental evidence. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(4), 518–536, doi: 10.1177/1745691615583128.
Li, Z. Q., Gao, L. P., Zhao, X., & Li, B. C. (2021). Deconfounding the effects of acute stress on abstract moral dilemma judgment. Current Psychology, 40(10), 5005–5018, doi: 10.1007/s12144-019-00453-0.
Liu, C. J., & Liao, J. Q. (2021). CAN algorithm: An individual level approach to identify consequence and norm sensitivities and overall action/inaction preferences in moral decision-making. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 547916, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.547916.
Nichols, S., & Mallon, R. (2006). Moral dilemmas and moral rules. Cognition, 100(3), 530–542, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.07.005.
Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716, doi: 10.1126/science.aac4716.
Patil, I., Cogoni, C., Zangrando, N., Chittaro, L., & Silani, G. (2014). Affective basis of judgment-behavior discrepancy in virtual experiences of moral dilemmas. Social Neuroscience, 9(1), 94–107, doi: 10.1080/17470919.2013.870091.
Pletti, C., Lotto, L., Buodo, G., & Sarlo, M. (2017). It’s immoral, but I’d do it! Psychopathy traits affect decision-making in sacrificial dilemmas and in everyday moral situations. British Journal of Psychology, 108(2), 351–368, doi: 10.1111/bjop.12205.
Rozin, P., Lowery, L., Imada, S., & Haidt, J. (1999). The CAD triad hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) and three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(4), 574–586, doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.76.4.574.
Rozin, P., Markwith, M., & McCauley, C. (1994). Sensitivity to indirect contacts with other persons: AIDS aversion as a composite of aversion to strangers, infection, moral taint, and misfortune. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103(3), 495–504, doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.103.3.495.
Schnall, S., Haidt, J., Clore, G. L., & Jordan, A. H. (2008). Disgust as embodied moral judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(8), 1096–1109, doi: 10.1177/0146167208317771.
Strohminger, N., Lewis, R. L., & Meyer, D. E. (2011). Divergent effects of different positive emotions on moral judgment. Cognition, 119(2), 295–300, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.12.012.
Valdesolo, P., & Desteno, D. (2006). Manipulations of emotional context shape moral judgment. Psychological Science, 17(6), 476–477, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01731.x.
Wagemans, F. M. A., Brandt, M. J., & Zeelenberg, M. (2018). Disgust sensitivity is primarily associated with purity-based moral judgments. Emotion, 18(2), 277–289, doi: 10.1037/emo0000359.