The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Intention–Outcome Trade‐Off in Moral Character Learning
Open accessAbstract
To evaluate an individuals’ moral character the intentions behind their actions must be discriminated from the actual outcome. How this is achieved remains unclear. We developed a novel paradigm that dissociates the perception of intentions from outcome. Participants separately predicted and received feedback on agents’ intentions and outcomes. They then made moral evaluations of the agent. Four independent experiments (120 participants in total) demonstrated that intentions and outcomes mutually influenced each other during the learning process before integrating them for subsequent moral evaluation. Computational modeling further revealed that intentions biased the predictions of outcomes, while outcomes directly modified the beliefs about intentions. Moreover, participants considered both intention and outcome when making moral evaluations, but placed greater weight on intention, regardless of sampling bias and presentation order. These findings offer new insights concerning how individuals process intention and outcome when learning about others’ moral character.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
Cites
Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction
Sutton, R. S., & Barto, A. G. (1998) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · doi:10.1109/tnn.1998.712192 · Cited by 27,225
AIC model selection using Akaike weights
Wagenmakers, E.-J., & Farrell, S. (2004) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03206482 · Cited by 2,684
The Chicago face database: a free stimulus set of faces and norming data
Ma, D. S., Correll, J., & Wittenbrink, B. (2015) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-014-0532-5 · Cited by 1,788
Crime and punishment: Distinguishing the roles of causal and intentional analyses in moral judgment
Cushman, F. (2008) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.03.006 · Cited by 990
Testing theories of fairness—Intentions matter
Falk, A., Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2007) · Games and Economic Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.geb.2007.06.001 · Cited by 706
A Person-Centered Approach to Moral Judgment
Uhlmann, E. L., Pizarro, D. A., & Diermeier, D. A. (2015) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691614556679 · Cited by 421
Simulating murder: The aversion to harmful action.
Cushman, F. A., Gray, K. J., Gaffey, A. E., & Mendes, W. B. (2011) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/a0025071 · Cited by 287
The neural basis of belief encoding and integration in moral judgment
Young, L., & Saxe, R. (2008) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.01.057 · Cited by 277
Cost-Benefit Arbitration Between Multiple Reinforcement-Learning Systems
Kool, W., Gershman, S. J., & Cushman, F. A. (2017) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797617708288 · Cited by 259
Confirmation bias in human reinforcement learning: Evidence from counterfactual feedback processing
Palminteri, S., Lefebvre, G., Kilford, E. J., & Blakemore, S. (2017) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005684 · Cited by 250
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Crockett M. J., 2021, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 1
Cited by
Still being checked.
Metadata
- Authors
- Huang, G., Xu, Y., Derrington, E., Dreher, J., & Qu, C.
- Affiliations
- South China Normal University (CN)
- Lyon 1 Université (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Dreher, Jean‐Claude
- Qu, Chen
- Venue
- Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2026-03
- Volume
- 1557
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- e70233-e70233
- ISSN
- 0077-8923 (ISSN-L)
- 1749-6632
- PMC
- PMC13537352
- OpenAlex
- W7138872243
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 30
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- correction (2026-05-18)
- Open access
- green
- pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- Locations
- Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (32171019)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- moral evaluation, intention perception, social learning, belief updating, sampling bias, presentation order, moral judgment
- MeSH terms
- Outcome Expectations, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Morals, Intention
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Intention–Outcome Trade‐Off in Moral Character Learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/nyas.70233
- The paper
- Huang, G., Xu, Y., Derrington, E., Dreher, J., & Qu, C. (2026). Intention–Outcome Trade‐Off in Moral Character Learning. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.70233
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
