Cognitive Process of Moral Decision-Making for Autonomous Agents

Author(s):  
José-Antonio Cervantes ◽  
Luis-Felipe Rodríguez ◽  
Sonia López ◽  
Félix Ramos ◽  
Francisco Robles

There are a great variety of theoretical models of cognition whose main purpose is to explain the inner workings of the human brain. Researchers from areas such as neuroscience, psychology, and physiology have proposed these models. Nevertheless, most of these models are based on empirical studies and on experiments with humans, primates, and rodents. In fields such as cognitive informatics and artificial intelligence, these cognitive models may be translated into computational implementations and incorporated into the architectures of intelligent autonomous agents (AAs). Thus, the main assumption in this work is that knowledge in those fields can be used as a design approach contributing to the development of intelligent systems capable of displaying very believable and human-like behaviors. Decision-Making (DM) is one of the most investigated and computationally implemented functions. The literature reports several computational models that enable AAs to make decisions that help achieve their personal goals and needs. However, most models disregard crucial aspects of human decision-making such as other agents' needs, ethical values, and social norms. In this paper, the authors present a set of criteria and mechanisms proposed to develop a biologically inspired computational model of Moral Decision-Making (MDM). To achieve a process of moral decision-making believable, the authors propose a cognitive function to determine the importance of each criterion based on the mood and emotional state of AAs, the main objective the model is to enable AAs to make decisions based on ethical and moral judgment.

2009 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 461-475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua E. Perry ◽  
Ilene N. Moore ◽  
Bruce Barry ◽  
Ellen Wright Clayton ◽  
Amanda R. Carrico

The empirical literature exploring lawyers and their moral decision making is limited despite the “crisis” of unethical and unprofessional behavior in the bar that has been well documented for over a decade. In particular we are unaware of any empirical studies that investigate the moral landscape of the health lawyer’s practice. In an effort to address this gap in the literature, an interdisciplinary team of researchers at Vanderbilt University designed an empirical study to gather preliminary evidence regarding the moral reasoning of health care attorneys. The primary research question was how health lawyers respond when they encounter ethical or moral dilemmas in their practice for which the law fails to offer a bright-line solution. In exploring this question, we sought to understand better what motivations or influences guide action when health lawyers confront ethical quandaries, and whether there are specific differences, e.g., gender, experience, or religiosity, that are associated with specific responses to situations testing ethical or moral boundaries.


Author(s):  
Sandra Baez ◽  
Michel Patiño-Sáenz ◽  
Jorge Martínez-Cotrina ◽  
Diego Mauricio Aponte ◽  
Juan Carlos Caicedo ◽  
...  

Abstract Traditional and mainstream legal frameworks conceive law primarily as a purely rational practice, free from affect or intuition. However, substantial evidence indicates that human decision-making depends upon diverse biases. We explored the manifestation of these biases through comparisons among 45 criminal judges, 60 criminal attorneys, and 64 controls. We examined whether these groups’ decision-making patterns were influenced by (a) the information on the transgressor’s mental state, (b) the use of gruesome language in harm descriptions, and (c) ongoing physiological states. Judges and attorneys were similar to controls in that they overestimated the damage caused by intentional harm relative to accidental harm. However, judges and attorneys were less biased towards punishments and harm severity ratings to accidental harms. Similarly, they were less influenced in their decisions by either language manipulations or physiological arousal. Our findings suggest that specific expertise developed in legal settings can attenuate some pervasive biases in moral decision processes.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfred W. Kaszniak ◽  
Cynda H. Rushton ◽  
Joan Halifax

The present paper is the product of collaboration between a neuroscientist, an ethicist, and a contemplative exploring issues around leadership, morality, and ethics. It is an exploration on how people in roles of responsibility can better understand how to engage in discernment processes with more awareness and a deeper sense of responsibility for others and themselves. It draws upon recent research and scholarship in neuroscience, contemplative science, and applied ethics to develop a practical understanding of how moral decision-making works and is essential in this time when there can seem to be an increasing moral vacuum in leadership.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document