부산대학교 도서관

Zhihui Wu,1– 3 Junyao Song,4 Xiyou Chen,1 Daoqun Ding,1– 3,5 Xiangyi Zhang1,6 1Department of Psychology, School of Education Science, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, People’s Republic of China; 2Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, People’s Republic of China; 3Center for Mind and Brain Science, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, People’s Republic of China; 4School of Psychology, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, People’s Republic of China; 5Research Base for Mental Health Education of Hunan Province, Changsha, People’s Republic of China; 6Cognition and Human Behavior Key Laboratory of Hunan Province, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Daoqun Ding; Xiangyi Zhang, Department of Psychology, School of Education Science, Hunan Normal University, 36 Lushan Road, Changsha, Hunan, 410081, People’s Republic of China, Email psychding@hunnu.edu.cn; xiangyizhang@hunnu.edu.cnPurpose: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) have been associated with various aspects of morality, but their precise impact on moral decision-making remains unclear. This study aims to explore how ACEs influence moral decision-making in sacrificial dilemmas.Methods: Study 1 employed traditional dilemma analysis to quantify utilitarian responses and compare them among groups with no, low, and high ACEs. Study 2 utilized the CNI model to quantify three determinants of moral decision-making: sensitivity to consequences (C parameter), sensitivity to norms (N parameter), and general action tendencies (I parameter). Differences in these parameters among groups with no, low, and high ACEs were investigated.Results: Both Study 1 and Study 2 revealed that the high-ACE and low-ACE groups showed significantly higher utilitarian responses compared to the no-ACE group. However, no notable differences emerged between the high-ACE and low-ACE groups. Study 2 found that the N parameter was significantly lower in the high-ACE group compared to the low and no-ACE groups. Similarly, the low-ACE group exhibited significantly lower scores in the N parameter compared to the no-ACE group. Additionally, no significant differences were observed in the C and I parameters among groups with no, low, and high ACEs.Conclusion: These findings suggest that individuals with a high number of ACEs tend to exhibit more utilitarian responses, attributed to decreased affective response to the violation of moral rules, rather than increased deliberative cost-benefit reasoning or a general preference for action. Such insights deepen our understanding of the precise aspects of moral decision-making influenced by ACEs.Keywords: adverse childhood experiences, moral decision-making, CNI model