Lin Junfei, Zhao Xinlu, Zhao Nian, Liu Tour
Key Laboratory of Adolescent Cyberpsychology and Behavior, Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China, Wuhan 430079, China.
Key Laboratory of Human Development and Mental Health of Hubei Province, Wuhan 430079, China.
Brain Sci. 2024 Oct 4;14(10):1005. doi: 10.3390/brainsci14101005.
Moral evaluation is identified as the first stage in the theory of moral judgment, and academics believe that it may align with the social intuitionist model. This study aims to prove that the model's emotional dominance hypothesis applies to moral evaluation by presenting a computational decision-making model that mathematically formalizes this emotional dominance decision-making process. We also compared different types of valence evaluation tasks to test the emotional priority hypothesis.
We used a convenience sampling method to randomly recruit 30 enrolled college students. The drift-diffusion model was employed to analyze reaction times for words with various emotional and moral valences Additionally, we designed different valence evaluation tasks based on the response relevance hypothesis and evaluated the processing order through reaction time comparisons.
The analysis revealed that the emotional mechanism of immoral evaluation differs from moral evaluation. An increase in emotional valence accelerates the speed of evidence accumulation (v) for moral evaluation ( = 1.21, 0.2% < 0 < 99.8%) but lowers decision caution (a) in immoral evaluation ( = -0.64, 96.1% < 0 < 3.9%). In contrast, moral valence does not have a significant influence on evaluation processes (v, = -0.28, 72.1% < 0 < 27.9%; a, = -0.32, 79.3% < 0 < 20.7%). Furthermore, We found no significant difference in reaction times between moral and immoral words in the emotional evaluation task ((1,29) = 0.55, = 0.464, partial = 0.02), but a significant difference existed in the moral evaluation task ((1,29) = 17.99, < 0.001, partial = 0.38), indicating that the tendency of relatively fast immoral evaluation in emotional evaluation tasks may be caused by emotional priority.
Our findings support the intuitive model's emotional dominance hypothesis and introduce a new emotional mechanism into moral evaluation. This study clarifies the distinct emotional processes in moral and immoral evaluations, fills a gap in the research on moral evaluation, and offers insights into human decision-making in moral contexts.
道德评价被视为道德判断理论的第一阶段,学者们认为它可能与社会直觉模型相符。本研究旨在通过提出一个计算决策模型来证明该模型的情感主导假设适用于道德评价,该模型以数学形式对这种情感主导决策过程进行了形式化。我们还比较了不同类型的效价评价任务,以检验情感优先假设。
我们采用便利抽样法随机招募了30名在校大学生。运用漂移扩散模型分析具有不同情感和道德效价的词语的反应时间。此外,我们根据反应相关性假设设计了不同的效价评价任务,并通过反应时间比较来评估加工顺序。
分析表明,不道德评价的情感机制与道德评价不同。情感效价的增加会加快道德评价中证据积累的速度(v)(=1.21,0.2%<0<99.8%),但会降低不道德评价中的决策谨慎性(a)(=-0.64,96.1%<0<3.9%)。相比之下,道德效价对评价过程没有显著影响(v,=-0.28,72.1%<0<27.9%;a,=-0.32,79.3%<0<20.7%)。此外,我们发现情感评价任务中道德词和不道德词的反应时间没有显著差异((1,29)=0.55,=0.464,偏相关系数=0.02),但在道德评价任务中有显著差异((1,29)=17.99,<0.001,偏相关系数=0.38),这表明情感评价任务中相对较快的不道德评价倾向可能是由情感优先导致的。
我们的研究结果支持直觉模型的情感主导假设,并为道德评价引入了一种新的情感机制。本研究阐明了道德和不道德评价中不同的情感过程,填补了道德评价研究的空白,并为人类在道德情境中的决策提供了见解。