The intuitive greater good: Testing the corrective dual process model of moral cognition.

Abstract

Building on the old adage that the deliberate mind corrects the emotional heart, the influential dual process model of moral cognition has posited that utilitarian responding to moral dilemmas (i.e., choosing the greater good) requires deliberate correction of an intuitive deontological response. In the present article, we present 4 studies that force us to revise this longstanding "corrective" dual process assumption. We used a two-response paradigm in which participants had to give their first, initial response to moral dilemmas under time-pressure and cognitive load. Next, participants could take all the time they wanted to reflect on the problem and give a final response. This allowed us to identify the intuitively generated response that preceded the final response given after deliberation. Results consistently show that in the vast majority of cases (ϩ70%) in which people opt for a utilitarian response after deliberation, the utilitarian response is already given in the initial phase. Hence, utilitarian responders do not need to deliberate to correct an initial deontological response. Their intuitive response is already utilitarian in nature. We show how this leads to a revised model in which moral judgments depend on the absolute and relative strength differences between competing deontological and utilitarian intuitions.

Logic, Fast and Slow: Advances in Dual-Process Theorizing

“…In theory, the various paradigms we introduced can be used to test dual-process assumptions beyond logical reasoning tasks. Interestingly, initial findings with the conflict detection and two-response paradigm point to a remarkable similarity between logical and moral reasoning: The moral response that is traditionally believed to result from deliberate processing (i.e., calculating the greater good) often is cued intuitively (e.g., Bago & De Neys, 2019c;Bialek & De Neys, 2017). Although this lends some credence to the generality of the findings it will be critical to test the applicability of the new architecture in various contexts.…”

The dual-process approach to human sociality: Meta-analytic evidence for a theory of internalized heuristics for self-preservation

“…Main result Time constraint studies Suter & Hertwig (2011) SD Pressure increases deontological choices Cummins & Cummins (2012) SD Pressure increases deontological choices Trémolière & Bonnefon (2014) SD varying save/kill Pressure increases deontological choices for save/kill = 5 but not save/kill = 500 Cognitive load studies Greene et al (2008) SD Load increases response time of utilitarian choices Trémolière & Bonnefon (2014) SD varying save/kill Load increases deontological choices for save/kill = 5 but not save/kill = 500 Conway and Gawronski (2013) SD process dissociation Load reduces utilitarian judgments, while leaving deontological judgments unaffected Białek & De Neys (2017). SD Load reduces utilitarian judgments Hayakawa et al (2017) SD process dissociation Second language decreases deontological judgments, but has no effect on utilitarian judgments SD process dissociation Load reduces utilitarian judgments, while leaving deontological judgments unaffected Muda et al (2018) SD process dissociation Second language decreases both deontological and utilitarian judgments Conceptual primes studies Valdesolo & DeSteno (2006) SD Affect induction increases deontological judgments Paxton et al (2012) SD Deliberation induction increases utilitarian judgments Costa et al (2014) SD Second language increases utilitarian judgments Measure Main result Kvaran et al (2013) SD Emotional prime increases deontological judgments; analytical prime increases utilitarian judgments Geipel et al (2015a) SD Second language increases utilitarian judgments Cipolletti et al (2016) SD Second language increases utilitarian judgments Corey et al (2017) SD Second language increases utilitarian judgments Spears et al (2018) SD Attention prime increases utilitarian judgments Capraro et al 2019OUS Intuition increases nonutilitarian judgments in the instrumental harm dimension; intuition has no effect on beneficence dimension Ego depletion studies Trémolière et al (2012) SD Depletion increases deontological judgments Timmons & Byrne 2018SD Depletion increases deontological judgments 2-response paradigm studies SD Bago & De Neys (2018) Most utilitarian deliberative judgments were already utilitarian under intuition Note: SD stands for sacrificial dilemmas game; OUS stands for Oxford Utilitarianism Scale.…”

Crime and punishment: Morality judgment in a foreign language.

“…Costa et al, 2014), which arises when employing a foreign 5 language (Cop, Drieghe, & Duyck, 2015). However, a recent study on the validity of the dual-process theory showed that, in the majority of cases, utilitarian replies are already provided at the initial (automated) response stage, without deliberation having taken place (Bago & De Neys, 2019). This makes a cognitive account of the moral foreign language effect less plausible, as cognitive reasoning is not the main source of utilitarianism.…”