Moral judgment and decision making, contractualism and virtual bargaining

道德心理学试图理解道德判断和决策背后的机制。这一领域的研究人员经常求助于道德哲学的规范性理论来构建对道德的描述性解释(Bartels等人，2015)。两个学派--结果论和道义论--在最近几十年里受到了特别的关注(Greene，2013)。简而言之，结果论将行为的道德性仅仅建立在其后果上。相反，对于道义论来说，某些行为本身就是对的或错的，与它们所带来的后果无关，这取决于具体的道德规则(Malle，2021)。第三个有影响力的理论家族--契约主义--在实证研究中受到的关注要少得多。契约论认为，道德是一个同意的问题，“如果受该行为影响的所有相关各方都能合理地同意(或至少不能合理地拒绝该行为)，则该行为在道德上是允许的”(Levine等人，2018年，第1页)。通常，契约主义者的关切(例如，同意、同意、共同利益)可能对理解道德的心理基础至关重要。虚拟讨价还价被认为是契约主义推理的一种具体形式。虚拟讨价还价是一种社会协调理论，它认为我们的许多社会互动都可以理解为虚拟讨价还价的结果，或者“社会参与者预期他们会达成协议，在那里他们参与显性的讨价还价”(Misyak等人，2014，p.512)。本项目运用心理学(如道德困境)和经济学(如经济学博弈)的实验方法，对契约主义者的道德判断和决策以及虚拟讨价还价过程在道德推理中所起的作用进行了实证研究。

Moral psychology attempts to understand the mechanisms that underlie moral judgment and decision making. Researchers in this area often appeal to normative theories from moral philosophy to construct descriptive accounts of morality (Bartels et al., 2015). Two schools of thought - consequentialism and deontology - have received particular attention in recent decades (Greene, 2013). Simply put, consequentialism bases the morality of an action on its consequences only. For deontology in contrast, certain actions are inherently right or wrong, independently of the consequences they bring about, depending on specific moral rules (Malle, 2021). A third influential family of theories - contractualism - has received much less attention in empirical work. Contractualism posits that morality is a matter of agreement and that "an act is morally permissible if all the parties relevantly affected by the act could reasonably agree to it (or at least, not reasonably reject it)" (Levine et al., 2018, p. 1). Typically contractualist concerns (e.g., agreement, consent, mutual interests) could be crucial to understand the psychological basis of morality. Virtual bargaining has been proposed as a specific form of contractualist reasoning. Virtual bargaining is a theory of social coordination which proposes that many of our social interactions can be understood as the result of virtual bargains or "agreements that social participants anticipate they would make, where they to engage in explicit bargaining" (Misyak et al., 2014, p. 512). This project uses experimental methods from psychology (e.g., moral dilemmas) and economics (e.g., economic games) to empirically investigate contractualist moral judgment and decision making and the role played by virtual bargaining processes in moral reasoning.