Sensitivity to moral principles predicts both deontological and utilitarian response tendencies in sacrificial dilemmas

Dries H. Bostyn, A. Roets, P. Conway

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

91 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

When facing sacrificial dilemmas in which harm maximizes outcomes, people appear sensitive to three moral principles: They are more averse to actively causing harm than passively allowing it (action principle), causing harm directly than indirectly (contact principle), and causing harm as a means than as a by-product of helping others (intention principle). Across five studies and a meta-analysis (N = 1,218), we examined whether individual differences in people’s sensitivity to these principles were related to participants’ moral preferences on sacrificial dilemmas. Interestingly, sensitivity to each of these principles was related to both elevated harm-rejection (i.e., deontological) as well as elevated outcome-maximization (i.e., utilitarian) response tendencies. Rather than increasing responses consistent with only one philosophical position, people sensitive to moral principles balanced moral concerns about causing harm and maximizing outcomes similar to people high in other measures of moral concern.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)436-445
JournalSocial Psychological and Personality Science
Volume13
Issue number2
Early online date29 Jul 2021
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2022

Keywords

  • moral dilemmas
  • process dissociation
  • deontology
  • utilitarianism
  • rules
  • principles
  • action principle
  • contact principle
  • intention principle

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Sensitivity to moral principles predicts both deontological and utilitarian response tendencies in sacrificial dilemmas'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this