Omission bias and perceived intention in children and adults

Abstract

Omission bias refers to the tendency to judge acts of commission as morally worse than equivalent acts of omission. Children aged 7-8 and 11-12 years, as well as adults, made moral judgements about acts of commission and omission in two conditions in which the protagonist obtained a self-directed benefit. In the antisocial condition, the other person was harmed; in the selfish condition, the other person was not harmed. The results showed that adults and both age groups of children judged that the agent who did something (act of commission) was morally worse than the agent who did nothing (omission) for both antisocial and selfish conditions, although this judgement tendency was clearer in the selfish condition than in the antisocial condition. Agent intention was held constant across commission and omission, but most participants rated the intention of the agent who did something as stronger than that of the agent who did nothing. These results suggest that omission bias occurs regardless of differences in age and situation. In addition, perceived intention appears to change in conjunction with omission bias.

Decision making processes based on social conventional rules in early adolescents with and without autism spectrum disorders

“…Moral dilemmas are often presented as variations of the basic trolley, bystander, or footbridge scenarios34, and two situations are presented to clarify the nature of the transgression believed to make the situation worse. In the final part of the story, an alternative action is proposed in the form of a commission or omission35. This alternative course typically results in less harm than the original bad outcome in terms of overall quantitative outcome, or in terms of providing other benefits2.…”

Seven- and eight-year-old children’s deception in the conflict situation

“…The factor is the omission bias. Since 7-and 8-year-olds believe that commission is worse than omission (Hayashi, 2015); the amount of passive deception increases from the ages of 6 to 7 and 8 years because they avoid active deception, which is a commission. Moreover, the results suggest that the omission bias may be stronger for the other person's benefit than in the conflict condition for the other person's benefit.…”

“…Moreover, there may be a relationship between passive deception and the ToM2. Passive deception decreases the guilt of deceiving the friend because 7-and 8-year-olds believe that commission is worse than omission (Hayashi, 2015).…”

Omission and commission in judgment and decision making: Understanding and linking action‐inaction effects using the concept of normality

“…At this point we note several associated mechanisms discussed in the literature for the omission bias and the action principle of harm, revealing further unnamed evaluation asymmetries between omission (inaction) and commission (action) (Baron, 2013). Compared to omissions, commissions are perceived as more intentional, more causally related to outcomes, and more morally accountable, with omissions at times interpreted as non-decisions (Hayashi, 2015;Kordes-de Vaal, 1996). Actions are also perceived as more controlled, attributed internal locus of control, elicit stronger emotional reactions in others than inactions, and agents that act are seen as more accountable than agents that do not act (Zeelenberg, van der Pligt, & de Vries, 2000).…”