Moral judgments are increasingly being understood as showing context dependent variability. A growing literature has identified a range of specific contextual factors (e.g., emotions, intentions) that can influence moral judgments in predictable ways. Integrating these diverse influences into a unified approach to understanding moral judgments remains a challenge. Recent work by Railton (2017) attempted to address this with a causal-evaluative modelling approach to moral judgment. In support of this model Railton presents evidence from novel variations of classic trolley type dilemmas. We present results from a pre-registered pilot study that highlight a significant confound and demonstrate that it likely influenced Railton's results. Building on this, our registered report presents a replication-extension of Railton's study, using larger more diverse samples, and more rigorous methods and materials, specifically controlling for potential confounds. We found that participants' judgments in sacrificial dilemmas are influenced by both direct personal force, and by whether harm occurs as a means or as a side-effect of action. We also show the relationship between a range of individual difference variables and responses to sacrificial moral dilemmas. Our results provide novel insights into the factors that influence people's moral judgments, and contribute to ongoing theoretical debates in moral psychology.

中文翻译：

---

招手还是不招手：测试道德判断的因果评价模型方法：注册报告


道德判断越来越被理解为显示出依赖于环境的可变性。越来越多的文献已经确定了一系列可以以可预测的方式影响道德判断的特定背景因素（例如情绪、意图）。将这些不同的影响整合到一个统一的方法中来理解道德判断仍然是一个挑战。 Railton (2017) 最近的工作试图通过道德判断的因果评估建模方法来解决这个问题。为了支持这个模型，莱顿提出了经典电车类型困境的新变体的证据。我们展示了一项预先注册的试点研究的结果，强调了一个重大的混淆，并证明它可能影响了 Railton 的结果。在此基础上，我们的注册报告提出了 Railton 研究的复制扩展，使用了更大、更多样化的样本以及更严格的方法和材料，特别是控制了潜在的混杂因素。我们发现，参与者在牺牲困境中的判断既受到直接个人力量的影响，也受到伤害是作为行动的手段还是副作用发生的影响。我们还展示了一系列个体差异变量与对牺牲道德困境的反应之间的关系。我们的研究结果为影响人们道德判断的因素提供了新颖的见解，并为道德心理学中正在进行的理论辩论做出了贡献。