Abstract
Is it acceptable and moral to sacrifice a few people's lives to save many others? Research on moral dilemmas in psychology, experimental philosophy and neuropsychology has shown that respondents judge utilitarian personal moral actions (footbridge dilemma) as less appropriate than equivalent utilitarian impersonal moral actions (trolley dilemma). Accordingly, theorists (e.g., Greene et al., 2001) have argued that judgments of appropriateness in personal moral dilemmas are more emotionally salient and cognitively demanding (taking more time to be rational) than impersonal moral dilemmas. Our novel findings show an effect of psychological accessibility (driven by partial contextual information; Kahneman, 2003) on utilitarian moral behavior and response time for rational choices. Enhanced accessibility of utilitarian outcomes through comprehensive information about moral actions and consequences boosted utility maximization in moral choices, with rational choices taking less time. Moreover, our result suggests that previous results indicating emotional interference, with rational choices taking more time to make, may have been artifacts of presenting partial information.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1961-1967 |
| Journal | Psychonomic Bulletin and Review |
| Volume | 23 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| Early online date | 26 Apr 2016 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 31 Dec 2016 |
Bibliographical note
Note: This work was supported by Economic and Social Research Council [grant RES-000-22-1768], the Nuffield Foundation [grant SGS36177] and The British Academy [grants SG47881/SG091144].Impact: In contrast to dual process moral theory (and neuropsychological/behavioral research on moral psychology), our findings reveal that psychological accessibility (driven by partial contextual information; Kahneman, 2003) predicts abstract utilitarian moral choice and response time for rational choices. Accessibility (and not emotion based interference), determines utilitarian behavior. Enhanced accessibility of utilitarian outcomes through comprehensive information about moral actions and consequences boosted utility maximization in moral choices, with rational choices taking less time. Moreover, our result suggests that previous results indicating emotional interference, with rational choices taking more time to make, may have been artifacts of presenting partial information.
In addition to the theoretical contributions to the utilitarian moral behavior paradigm (investigated by experimental philosophy and psychology, neuropsychology, and economics researcher) this paper offers a new experimental approach and methodological improvements.
Keywords
- Psychology