What Counts Underlying LLMs’ Moral Dilemma Judgments?

Moral judgments in LLMs increasingly capture the attention of researchers in AI ethics domain.This study explores moral judgments of three open-source large language models (LLMs)-Qwen-1.5-14B,Llama3-8B, and DeepSeek-R1 in plausible moral dilemmas, examining their sensitivity to social exposure and collaborative decision-making.Using a dualprocess framework grounded in deontology and utilitarianism, we evaluate LLMs' responses to moral dilemmas under varying social contexts.Results reveal that all models are significantly influenced by moral norms rather than consequences, with DeepSeek-R1 exhibiting a stronger action tendency compared to Qwen-1.5-14B and Llama3-8B, which show higher inaction preferences.Social exposure and collaboration impact LLMs differently: Qwen-1.5-14Bbecomes less aligned with moral norms under observation, while DeepSeek-R1's action tendency is moderated by social collaboration.These findings highlight the nuanced moral reasoning capabilities of LLMs and their varying sensitivity to social cues, providing insights into the ethical alignment of AI systems in socially embedded contexts.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.nlp4pi-1.12
Primary Topic
Ethics in Business and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What Counts Underlying LLMs’ Moral Dilemma Judgments?

Wei Wu, Weihong Deng
Ethics in Business and Education
article

What Counts Underlying LLMs’ Moral Dilemma Judgments?

Wei Wu, Weihong Deng
article en

Abstract

Moral judgments in LLMs increasingly capture the attention of researchers in AI ethics domain.This study explores moral judgments of three open-source large language models (LLMs)-Qwen-1.5-14B,Llama3-8B, and DeepSeek-R1 in plausible moral dilemmas, examining their sensitivity to social exposure and collaborative decision-making.Using a dualprocess framework grounded in deontology and utilitarianism, we evaluate LLMs' responses to moral dilemmas under varying social contexts.Results reveal that all models are significantly influenced by moral norms rather than consequences, with DeepSeek-R1 exhibiting a stronger action tendency compared to Qwen-1.5-14B and Llama3-8B, which show higher inaction preferences.Social exposure and collaboration impact LLMs differently: Qwen-1.5-14Bbecomes less aligned with moral norms under observation, while DeepSeek-R1's action tendency is moderated by social collaboration.These findings highlight the nuanced moral reasoning capabilities of LLMs and their varying sensitivity to social cues, providing insights into the ethical alignment of AI systems in socially embedded contexts.

Consumers Union (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
Ethics in Business and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

What Counts Underlying LLMs’ Moral Dilemma Judgments? — Wei Wu, Weihong Deng · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS