/maryland-parents-investigated-neglect-letting-6-10-year-old-children-walk-home-alone/ On page 3, Table 2 should read N=155 for Experiment 5. On page 8, paragraph 3 of Experiment 5's Results and Discussion, the sentence "Results were similar to those in Experiments 1-4, but the effect of moral condition on risk estimates was less pronounced" should be "Results were similar to those in Experiments 1-4." The words after "but" were left over from an earlier draft based on a preliminary analysis, which suggested that the effect was attenuated in Experiment 5. However, further analyses failed to confirm this finding and the clause should have been deleted from the final draft.On page 8, paragraph 6, the authors mistakenly double-counted those participants who both answered the attention-check question incorrectly AND spent less than 5 minutes completing the survey. This section should say: "Participants. A total of 701 participants were recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk for this experiment. Of those, 23 were excluded because they failed to answer the attention-check question, and 67 were excluded because they spent less than five minutes taking the survey (see Appendix B for an alternative analysis that includes data from these participants). The remaining 611 participants contributed data to the analysis."Similarly, the text on Page 10, paragraph 2, should read: "Summary of Participants. A total of 1898 participants were recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk across all six experiments. 102 were excluded because they failed to answer the question that checked whether they were reading the vignettes; and 295 were excluded because they spent less than five minutes taking the survey. (See Appendix B for a separate analysis that includes these participants' data.) The remaining 1501 participants contributed data to this analysis." Figure 1 has also been corrected to reflect this amendment.The authors apologize for not catching these errors. The full text of the corrected article follows below.