心理学
情感(语言学)
任务(项目管理)
道德困境
社会心理学
认知
反射(计算机编程)
认知需要
考试(生物学)
认知心理学
计算能力
双重过程理论(道德心理学)
反思性思维
计算机科学
古生物学
教育学
管理
沟通
神经科学
读写能力
经济
生物
程序设计语言
作者
Daniel L. Spears,Yasmina Okan,Irene Hinojosa-Aguayo,José C. Perales,Marı́a Ruz,Felisa González
标识
DOI:10.1080/09515089.2020.1861234
摘要
Evidence about whether reflective thinking may be induced and whether it affects utilitarian choices is inconclusive. Research suggests that answering items correctly in the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) before responding to dilemmas may lead to more utilitarian decisions. However, it is unclear to what extent this effect is driven by the inhibition of intuitive wrong responses (reflection) versus the requirement to engage in deliberative processing. To clarify this issue, participants completed either the CRT or the Berlin Numeracy Test (BNT) – which does not require reflection – before responding to moral dilemmas. To distinguish between the potential effect of participants' previous reflective traits and that of performing a task that can increase reflectivity, we manipulated whether participants received feedback for incorrect items. Findings revealed that both CRT and BNT scores predicted utilitarian decisions when feedback was not provided. Additionally, feedback enhanced performance for both tasks, although it only increased utilitarian decisions when it was linked to the BNT. Taken together, these results suggest that performance in a numeric task that requires deliberative thinking may predict utilitarian responses to moral dilemmas. The finding that feedback increased utilitarian decisions only in the case of BNT casts doubt upon the reflective-utilitarian link.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI