# TPvG: A Moral Decision Framework for Large Language Models from One-Shot to Sequential Feedback

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.28610 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.28610/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 11 of its 29 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 15 Jul 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07258/) (2021)
- [Aligning AI With Shared Human Values](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.02275/) (2020)
- [Social Chemistry 101: Learning to Reason about Social and Moral Norms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.00620/) (2020)
- [Evaluating the Moral Beliefs Encoded in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.14324/) (2023)
- [Can Machines Learn Morality? The Delphi Experiment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.07574/) (2021)
- [Moral Stories: Situated Reasoning about Norms, Intents, Actions, and their Consequences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.15738/) (2020)
- [Cooperate or Collapse: Emergence of Sustainable Cooperation in a Society of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.16698/) (2024)
- [When to Make Exceptions: Exploring Language Models as Accounts of Human Moral Judgment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.01478/) (2022)
- [NormBank: A Knowledge Bank of Situational Social Norms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17008/) (2023)
- [The Staircase of Ethics: Probing LLM Value Priorities through Multi-Step Induction to Complex Moral Dilemmas](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.18154/) (2025)
- [Skin-in-the-Game: Decision Making via Multi-Stakeholder Alignment in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.12933/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Existing LLM moral evaluations typically present models with isolated moral vignettes and elicit a single-shot decision, neglecting a factor known to profoundly influence human moral behavior: consequence feedback. We introduce TPvG (Text-based Pain-versus-Gain), adapted from a human moral paradigm, which embeds consequence feedback into an everyday moral dilemma of not harming others versus maximising self-gain. TPvG comprises five moral decision tasks, progressing from minimal-context one-shot choices to sequential decisions with explicit consequence feedback. Our results show that LLM moral decisions were strongly affected by decision format (one-shot versus sequential), and explicit receiver feedback produced heterogeneous effects across models. Furthermore, LLM responses to explicit receiver feedback diverged from the human reference pattern, suggesting potentially different decision processes. These findings highlight the need to evaluate whether LLM moral behavior remains stable in high-stakes interactive settings.