Omission and Commission in Judgment and Choice.¶
Spranca, M., Minsk, E., & Baron, J. (1991). Omission and Commission in Judgment and Choice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27(1), 76-105.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Omission Bias
- In ethics and moral philosophy it is the structure behind the acts/omissions doctrine and the intuitions probed by trolley problems — the widespread sense that actively diverting harm onto one person is worse than passively allowing a greater harm to befall others, even when the outcomes favor acting.
This sourceEstablishes the omission/commission distinction in moral judgment and its basis in causal and intentional attribution.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
The abstract reports the empirical omission/commission asymmetry in moral judgment and its link to causal attribution, but it never mentions the acts/omissions doctrine, trolley problems, or diverting harm onto one person.
“Subjects often rated harmful omissions as less immoral, or less bad as decisions, than harmful commissions. Such ratings were associated with judgments that omissions do not cause outcomes.”
- In ethics and moral philosophy it is the structure behind the acts/omissions doctrine and the intuitions probed by trolley problems — the widespread sense that actively diverting harm onto one person is worse than passively allowing a greater harm to befall others, even when the outcomes favor acting.
Mechanisms¶
- Omission–Commission Parity Check
- Its strength is that it drags the invisible enablers into view and stops responsibility concentrating on the last visible actor — a direct counter to the well-documented tendency to under-weight harmful omissions
This sourceFinds that harmful omissions are often rated less immoral or less bad than comparable harmful acts.
- Its strength is that it drags the invisible enablers into view and stops responsibility concentrating on the last visible actor — a direct counter to the well-documented tendency to under-weight harmful omissions
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 2 citations: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:6a9bfd53c4ed · see in the full table