4.7 Article

Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample

Journal

NATURE HUMAN BEHAVIOUR
Volume 6, Issue 6, Pages 880-+

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41562-022-01319-5

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Comunidad de Madrid [2016-T1/SOC-1395, 2020-5A/SOC-19723]
  2. AEI [PSI2017-85159-P]
  3. UE/FEDER
  4. National Science Centre, Poland [2017/01/X/HS6/01332, 2015/19/D/HS6/00641, 2019/35/B/HS6/00528]
  5. Aarhus University Research Foundation (AUFF) [AUFF-E-2019-9-4]
  6. ANR [ANR-17-EURE-0010]
  7. ANR Labex IAST
  8. Australian Research Council [DP180102384]
  9. CAPES [88887.364180/2019-00]
  10. Carlsberg Foundation [CF16-0444]
  11. Independent Research Fund Denmark [7024-00057B]
  12. Germany's Excellence Strategy [EXC 2126/1-390838866]
  13. FONDECYT, CONICYT [11190980]
  14. German Research Foundation [FOR-2150, LA 3566/1-2]
  15. JSPS [18K03010]
  16. JSPS KAKENHI [16H03079, 17H00875, 18K12015, 20H04581, 17H06342, 20K03479, 20KK0054, 20J21976]
  17. Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [31530032]
  18. Key Technological Projects of Guangdong Province [2018B030335001]
  19. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship [DGE-1839285]
  20. Polish National Science Center
  21. DFG Beethoven [2016/23/G/HS6/01775]
  22. Portuguese National Foundation for Science and Technology [SFRH/BD/126304/2016, UID/PSI/03125/2019]
  23. PRIN 2017 (Italian Ministry of Education and Research) [20178293XT]
  24. PSA 006 BRA 008 Data Collection in Support of PSADM 001 Measurement Invariance Project
  25. Foundation for Polish Science (START)
  26. National Science Centre [2020/36/T/HS6/00256, 2019/33/N/HS6/00054]
  27. Slovak Research and Development Agency [APVV-18-0140, APVV-17-0418, PRIMUS/20/HUM/009, APVV-17-0596]
  28. Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada [950-224884]
  29. Swedish Research Council [2016-06793]
  30. Project of Philosophy and Social Science Research in Colleges and Universities in Jiangsu Province [2020SJA0017]
  31. Swedish Research Council [2016-06793] Funding Source: Swedish Research Council
  32. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [18K03010, 20J21976, 20K03479, 20H04581, 20KK0054, 17H06342, 16H03079, 17H00875, 18K12015] Funding Source: KAKEN
  33. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [UID/PSI/03125/2019, SFRH/BD/126304/2016] Funding Source: FCT

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study focuses on moral judgements in moral dilemmas, where deontological perspectives conflict with utilitarian judgements. Psychological and situational factors influence moral dilemma judgements. The study replicates and expands previous experiments in 45 countries, finding that personal force and intention affect moral judgements, particularly in the US and Western cultural clusters.
The study of moral judgements often centres on moral dilemmas in which options consistent with deontological perspectives (that is, emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with options consistent with utilitarian judgements (that is, following the greater good based on consequences). Greene et al. (2009) showed that psychological and situational factors (for example, the intent of the agent or the presence of physical contact between the agent and the victim) can play an important role in moral dilemma judgements (for example, the trolley problem). Our knowledge is limited concerning both the universality of these effects outside the United States and the impact of culture on the situational and psychological factors affecting moral judgements. Thus, we empirically tested the universality of the effects of intent and personal force on moral dilemma judgements by replicating the experiments of Greene et al. in 45 countries from all inhabited continents. We found that personal force and its interaction with intention exert influence on moral judgements in the US and Western cultural clusters, replicating and expanding the original findings. Moreover, the personal force effect was present in all cultural clusters, suggesting it is culturally universal. The evidence for the cultural universality of the interaction effect was inconclusive in the Eastern and Southern cultural clusters (depending on exclusion criteria). We found no strong association between collectivism/individualism and moral dilemma judgements. Including participants from 45 countries, Bago et al. find that the situational factors that affect moral reasoning are shared across countries, with diminished observed cultural variation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available