File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Action-inaction asymmetries in moral scenarios: Replication of the omission bias examining morality and blame with extensions linking to causality, intent, and regret

TitleAction-inaction asymmetries in moral scenarios: Replication of the omission bias examining morality and blame with extensions linking to causality, intent, and regret
Authors
KeywordsOmission bias
Omission
Commission
Action
Inaction
Issue Date2020
PublisherAcademic Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jesp
Citation
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2020, v. 89, article no. 103977 How to Cite?
AbstractOmission bias is the preference for harm caused through omissions over harm caused through commissions. In a pre-registered experiment (N = 313), we successfully replicated an experiment from Spranca, Minsk, and Baron (1991), considered a classic demonstration of the omission bias, examining generalizability to a between-subject design with extensions examining causality, intent, and regret. Participants in the harm through commission condition(s) rated harm as more immoral and attributed higher responsibility compared to participants in the harm through omission condition (d = 0.45 to 0.47 and d = 0.40 to 0.53). An omission-commission asymmetry was also found for perceptions of causality and intent, in that commissions were attributed stronger action-outcome links and higher intentionality (d = 0.21 to 0.58). The effect for regret was opposite from the classic findings on the action-effect, with higher regret for inaction over action (d = −0.26 to −0.19). Overall, higher perceived causality and intent were associated with higher attributed immorality and responsibility, and with lower perceived regret. All materials are available on: https://osf.io/9gsqe/
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/295511
ISSN
2021 Impact Factor: 3.532
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.401
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorJamison, J-
dc.contributor.authorYay, T-
dc.contributor.authorFeldman, G-
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-25T11:15:55Z-
dc.date.available2021-01-25T11:15:55Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2020, v. 89, article no. 103977-
dc.identifier.issn0022-1031-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/295511-
dc.description.abstractOmission bias is the preference for harm caused through omissions over harm caused through commissions. In a pre-registered experiment (N = 313), we successfully replicated an experiment from Spranca, Minsk, and Baron (1991), considered a classic demonstration of the omission bias, examining generalizability to a between-subject design with extensions examining causality, intent, and regret. Participants in the harm through commission condition(s) rated harm as more immoral and attributed higher responsibility compared to participants in the harm through omission condition (d = 0.45 to 0.47 and d = 0.40 to 0.53). An omission-commission asymmetry was also found for perceptions of causality and intent, in that commissions were attributed stronger action-outcome links and higher intentionality (d = 0.21 to 0.58). The effect for regret was opposite from the classic findings on the action-effect, with higher regret for inaction over action (d = −0.26 to −0.19). Overall, higher perceived causality and intent were associated with higher attributed immorality and responsibility, and with lower perceived regret. All materials are available on: https://osf.io/9gsqe/-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherAcademic Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jesp-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Experimental Social Psychology-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectOmission bias-
dc.subjectOmission-
dc.subjectCommission-
dc.subjectAction-
dc.subjectInaction-
dc.titleAction-inaction asymmetries in moral scenarios: Replication of the omission bias examining morality and blame with extensions linking to causality, intent, and regret-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailFeldman, G: gfeldman@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityFeldman, G=rp02342-
dc.description.naturepostprint-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jesp.2020.103977-
dc.identifier.hkuros320962-
dc.identifier.volume89-
dc.identifier.spagearticle no. 103977-
dc.identifier.epagearticle no. 103977-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000537856100006-
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-
dc.identifier.issnl0022-1031-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats