CAN Algorithm: An Individual Level Approach to Identify Consequence and Norm Sensitivities and Overall Action/Inaction Preferences in Moral Decision-Making

Recently, a multinomial process tree model was developed to measure an agent’s consequence sensitivity, norm sensitivity, and generalized inaction/action preferences when making moral decisions (CNI model). However, the CNI model presupposed that an agent considers consequences — norms —generalized...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inFrontiers in psychology Vol. 11; p. 547916
Main Authors Liu, Chuanjun, Liao, Jiangqun
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Switzerland Frontiers Media S.A 13.01.2021
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1664-1078
1664-1078
DOI10.3389/fpsyg.2020.547916

Cover

More Information
Summary:Recently, a multinomial process tree model was developed to measure an agent’s consequence sensitivity, norm sensitivity, and generalized inaction/action preferences when making moral decisions (CNI model). However, the CNI model presupposed that an agent considers consequences — norms —generalized inaction / action preferences sequentially, which is untenable based on recent evidence. Besides, the CNI model generates parameters at the group level based on binary categorical data. Hence, the C / N / I parameters cannot be used for correlation analyses or other conventional research designs. To solve these limitations, we developed the CAN algorithm to compute norm and consequence sensitivities and overall action / inaction preferences algebraically in a parallel manner. We re-analyzed the raw data of the original CNI model to test the methodological predictions. Our results demonstrate that: (1) the C parameter is approximately equal between the CNI model and CAN algorithm; (2) the N parameter under the CNI model approximately equals N /(1 − C ) under the CAN algorithm; (3) the I parameter and A parameter are reversed around 0.5 – the larger the I parameter, the more the generalized inaction versus action preference and the larger the A parameter, the more overall action versus inaction preference; (4) tests of differences in parameters between groups with the CNI model and CAN algorithm led to almost the same statistical conclusion; (5) parameters from the CAN algorithm can be used for correlational analyses and multiple comparisons, and this is an advantage over the parameters from the CNI model. The theoretical and methodological implications of our study were also discussed.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
Edited by: Elisa Pedroli, Istituto Auxologico Italiano (IRCCS), Italy
This article was submitted to Quantitative Psychology and Measurement, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
Reviewed by: Nathaniel Haines, The Ohio State University, United States; Cosimo Tuena, Istituto Auxologico Italiano (IRCCS), Italy
ISSN:1664-1078
1664-1078
DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.547916