Uncertain Facts or Uncertain Values? Testing the Distinction Between Empirical and Normative Uncertainty in Moral Judgments.

People can be uncertain in their moral judgments. Philosophers have argued that such uncertainty can either refer to the underlying empirical facts (empirical uncertainty) or to the normative evaluation of these facts itself (normative uncertainty). Psychological investigations of this distinction, however, are rare. In this paper, we combined factor-analytical and experimental approaches to show that empirical and normative uncertainty describe two related but different psychological states. In Study 1, we asked N = 265 participants to describe a case of moral uncertainty and to rate different aspects of their uncertainty about this case. Across this wide range of moral scenarios, our items loaded onto three reliable factors: lack of information, unclear consequences, and normative uncertainty. In Study 2, we confirmed this factor structure using predefined stimulus material. N = 402 participants each rated eight scenarios that systematically varied in their degree of uncertainty regarding the consequences of the described actions and in the value conflict that was inherent to them. The empirical uncertainty factors were mainly affected by the introduction of uncertainty regarding consequences, and the normative uncertainty factor was mainly affected by the introduction of value conflict. Our studies provide evidence that the distinction between empirical and normative uncertainty accurately describes a psychological reality. We discuss the relevance of our findings for research on moral judgments and decision-making, and folk metaethics.

Measuring Achievement, Affiliation, and Power Motives in Mobility Situations: Development of the Multi-Motive Grid Mobility.

The current study introduces the Multi-Motive Grid Mobility (MMG-M) in an age-stratified sample (N = 206) that aims to disentangle six motive components - hope of success, hope of affiliation, hope of power, fear of failure, fear of rejection, and fear of power - in mobility-related and mobility-unrelated scenarios. Similar to the classical Multi-Motive Grid (MMG), we selected 14 picture scenarios representing seven mobility and seven non-mobility situations. The scenarios were combined with 12 statements from the MMG. Both the MMG-M and MMG were assessed to allow comparability between psychometric criteria. The results of confirmatory factor analyses yielded a good model fit for a six-factor solution with an additional mobility factor for the MMG-M. Internal consistency of the items was similar to the MMG. Lastly, we investigated associations between the motive components and mobility-related variables. We found that risk awareness was positively related to all fear components in both mobility and non-mobility scenarios. Most importantly, physical constraint was positively associated with fear of rejection and fear of power in mobility situations underlining the importance to create support systems to reduce these concerns in people's everyday lives.

Age differences in diffusion model parameters: a meta-analysis.

Older adults typically show slower response times in basic cognitive tasks than younger adults. A diffusion model analysis allows the clarification of why older adults react more slowly by estimating parameters that map distinct cognitive components of decision making. The main components of the diffusion model are the speed of information uptake (drift rate), the degree of conservatism regarding the decision criterion (boundary separation), and the time taken up by non-decisional processes (i.e., encoding and motoric response execution; non-decision time). While the literature shows consistent results regarding higher boundary separation and longer non-decision time for older adults, results are more complex when it comes to age differences in drift rates. We conducted a multi-level meta-analysis to identify possible sources of this variance. As possible moderators, we included task difficulty and task type. We found that age differences in drift rate are moderated both by task type and task difficulty. Older adults were inferior in drift rate in perceptual and memory tasks, but information accumulation was even increased in lexical decision tasks for the older participants. Additionally, in perceptual and lexical decision tasks, older individuals benefitted from high task difficulty. In the memory tasks, task difficulty did not moderate the negative impact of age on drift. The finding of higher boundary separation and longer non-decision time in older than younger adults generalized over task type and task difficulty. The results of our meta-analysis are consistent with recent findings of a more pronounced age-related decline in memory than in vocabulary performance.