Resource-Rational Virtual Bargaining for Moral Judgment: Toward a Probabilistic Cognitive Model

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Psychology
• Moral Psychology
• Behavioral Economics

Background:

• Resource rational contractualism theory suggests moral decisions involve approximations of ideal negotiation due to resource limitations.
• Moral psychology may employ a spectrum of mechanisms, balancing accuracy with resource demands.

Purpose of the Study:

• To empirically test the claim that higher stakes trigger more resource-intensive decision-making processes.
• To investigate cognitive models of moral decision-making under varying resource constraints.

Main Methods:

• Participants evaluated scenarios using either virtual bargaining (resource-intensive) or a standard rule (less intensive).
• Behavioral data was analyzed to identify decision-making strategies across different stakes.
• A cognitive model was developed to assess the resource-rational hypothesis.

Main Results:

• Approximately one-third of participants flexibly employed resource-rational strategies, using virtual bargaining for high-stakes and rules for low-stakes situations.
• One-third consistently used rule-based approaches, while another third consistently used virtual bargaining.
• Models supporting the reverse hypothesis (resource-intensive for low stakes) did not fit the observed data.

Conclusions:

• Empirical evidence supports the resource-rational contractualism model, demonstrating adaptive cognitive strategies in moral decision-making.
• Human moral psychology flexibly allocates cognitive resources, prioritizing accuracy in high-stakes scenarios.
• Individual differences exist, with some participants consistently favoring rule-based or bargaining approaches.