## 4 Results--Emotional Response Predicted Values
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Prediction/Dependent** & **ETH_L** & **ETH_P** & **FIN_L** & **PN_P** & **HEA_L** & **HEA_P** & **SOC_L** & **SOC_P** & **REC_L** & **REC_P** \\ \hline Angry 1 & \(-\)70.349 \({}^{**}\) & & & & & & & & 22.442 \({}^{**}\) & & \\ Angry 5 & 35.700 \({}^{**}\) & & & & & & & & & \\ Disgusted 2 & \(-\)59.387 \({}^{*}\) & & & & & & & & \\ Disgusted 15 & 62.642 \({}^{**}\) & & & & & & & & \\ Fearfall 1 & & & & \(-\)119.941 \({}^{*}\) & & & & & & \\ Fearfall 3 & & & & \(-\)119.941 \({}^{*}\) & & & & & & \\ Fearfall 4 & & & & & & & & & \\ Fearfall 7 & 71.613 \({}^{**}\) & & & & & & & & \\ Fearfall 8 & & & & & & & & & \\ Fearfall 9 & 20.145 \({}^{**}\) & & & & & & & & \\ Fearfall 10 & & & & & & & & & \\ Fearfall 13 & & & & & & & & & \\ Happy 8 & & & & & & & & & \\ Happy 12 & & & & & & & & & \\ Happy 14 & & & & & & & & & \\ Neutral 5 & & 1.032 \({}^{*}\) & & & & & & & & \\ Neutral 6 & & & & & & & & & \\ Sad 2 & & & & & & & & & \\ Sad 5 & & & & & & & & & \\ Sad 15 & & & & & & & & & \\ Surprised 5 & & & & & & & & & \\ Smartant & 2.308 \({}^{**}\) & & 4.022 \({}^{**}\) & 3.721 \({}^{**}\) & 4.696 \({}^{**}\) & 3.333 \({}^{**}\) & 4.682 \({}^{**}\) & 5.615 \({}^{**}\) & 2.613 \({}^{**}\) & 4.221 \({}^{**}\) & 4.692 \({}^{**}\) \\ \hline Adjusted R\({}^{2}\) & 0.370 & 0.338 & 0.389 & 0.190 & 0.188 & 0.276 & 0.245 & 0.090 & 0.177 & 0.273 \\ N & 65 & 65 & 65 & 65 & 65 & 65 & 65 & 65 & 65 & 65 \\ \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{*}\)_p_ \(<\) 0.085, \({}^{**}\)_p_ \(<\) 0.031, \({}^{**}\)_p_ \(<\) 0.001, ETH_L = ethical Isothboard, ETH_P = ethical perceived; FIN_L = financial Isothboard; FIN_P = financial Isothboard; FIN_P = health perceived; SOC_L = social Isothboard; SOC_P = social perceived; REC_L = recreational Isothboard; REC_P = recreational perceived.  
\end{table} 
Table 4: Regression models for the DOSPERT scale values. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Predictor/Dependent** & **Harm/Care** & **Fairness/Reciprocity** & **In-Group Loyalty** & **Authority/Respect** & **Purity/Sanctity** \\ \hline Angry 4 & & & 71.456 * & \\ Happy 3 & \(-\)4.152 * & & \(-\)3.442 * & \\ Happy 10 & & & \(-\)5.078 ** & \\ Neutral 2 & \(-\)7.783 *** & & & \\ Neutral 6 & & \(-\)7.897 *** & & \\ Neutral 7 & & \(-\)5.329 ** & & \\ Neutral 10 & & 3.391 * & & \\ Sad 2 & & & & 16.123 ** \\ Surprised 14 & & & 143.987 * & 179.091 ** \\ Constant & 28.435 *** & 25.585 *** & 21.432 *** & 13.294 *** & 10.433 *** \\ \hline Adjusted R\({}^{2}\) & 0.261 & 0.193 & 0.115 & 0.197 & 0.200 \\ N & 69 & 69 & 69 & 69 \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{l}{* \(p<\) 0.05; ** \(p<\) 0.01; *** \(p<\) 0.001.} \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Regression models for the Haidt moral values. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c} \hline \hline
**Variable** & **Average Accuracy** & **Cohen’s Kappa** \\ \hline Conservation & 73.3\% & 0.57 \\ Transcendence & 71.4\% & 0.53 \\ \hline Authority/respect & 73.3\% & 0.61 \\ Fairness/reciprocity & 73.3\% & 0.56 \\ Harm/care & 86.7\% & 0.79 \\ In-group loyalty & 80.0\% & 0.66 \\ Purity/sanctity & 73.3\% & 0.58 \\ \hline Agreeableness & 81.3\% & 0.71 \\ Conscientiousness & 78.9\% & 0.69 \\ Extraversion & 72.2\% & 0.58 \\ Neuroticism & 82.3\% & 0.73 \\ Openness to experience & 72.2\% & 0.58 \\ \hline Ethical likelihood & 78.6\% & 0.65 \\ Ethical perceived & 78.6\% & 0.68 \\ Financial likelihood & 84.6\% & 0.77 \\ Financial perceived & 78.6\% & 0.68 \\ Health likelihood & 84.6\% & 0.75 \\ Health perceived & 60.0\% & 0.38 \\ Recreational likelihood & 71.4\% & 0.59 \\ Recreational perceived & 86.7\% & 0.80 \\ Social likelihood & 76.9\% & 0.63 \\ Social perceived & 71.4\% & 0.57 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Accuracy of Xgboost models.