Moral judgment; moral development; personality; psychopathology; General Psychology; Empathy
Abstract :
[en] The aim of the present study was to demonstrate and extend the causal effect of participants' perspectives on moral decision-making using trolley problems and variants. Additionally, we investigated whether empathy and borderline (BDL) personality traits predicted participants' choices in these scenarios. We used both a classical trolley problem (a causing harm scenario) and an everyday trolley-like problem (a causing inconvenience scenario). Participants (N = 427, women: 54%) completed BDL traits and empathy questionnaires and, randomly, the two types of trolley problems, presenting both three different perspectives. Our study provided strong evidence that the perspective from which participants were enrolled in the trolley problem caused significant changes in their moral decision-making. Furthermore, we found that affective empathy and BDL traits significantly predicted participants' decisions in the causing inconvenience scenario, while only BDL traits predicted choices in the causing harm scenario. This study was original in providing new experimental materials, causal results, and highlighting the significant influence of BDL traits and affective empathy on moral decision-making. These findings raised fundamental questions, which are further developed in the discussion section.
Disciplines :
Social, industrial & organizational psychology
Author, co-author :
Nasello, Julian ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Unités de recherche interfacultaires > Research Unit for a life-Course perspective on Health and Education (RUCHE) ; Psychiatric Day Hospital "La Clé
Dardenne, Benoît ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de Psychologie > Psychologie sociale
Hansenne, Michel ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de Psychologie > Psychologie de la personnalité et des différences individuelles
Blavier, Adelaïde ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de Psychologie > Psycho-traumatisme
Triffaux, Jean-Marc ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > > Service de psychiatrie ; Psychiatric Day Hospital "La Clé
Language :
English
Title :
Moral Decision-Making in Trolley Problems and Variants: How Do Participants' Perspectives, Borderline Personality Traits, and Empathy Predict Choices?
Armstrong, J., Friesdorf, R., & Conway, P. (2019). Clarifying gender differences in moral dilemma judgments: The complementary roles of harm aversion and action aversion. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10 (3), 353–363. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550618755873
Batson, C. D. (1987). Prosocial motivation: Is it ever truly altruistic? Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 65–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60412-8
Batson, C. D. (2011). Altruism in humans. Oxford University Press.
Batson, C. D., Duncan, B. D., Ackerman, P., Buckley, T., & Birch, K. (1981). Is empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40 (2), 290–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.40.2.290
Batson, C. D., Lishner, D. A., & Stocks, E. L. (2015). The empathy—Altruism hypothesis. In D. A. Schroeder & W. G. Graziano (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of prosocial behavior (pp. 259–281). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195399813.013.023
Bauman, C. W., McGraw, A. P., Bartels, D. M., & Warren, C. (2014). Revisiting external validity: Concerns about trolley problems and other sacrificial dilemmas in moral psychology. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8 (9), 536–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12131
Blair, R. J. R. (2005). Responding to the emotions of others: Dissociating forms of empathy through the study of typical and psychiatric populations. Consciousness and Cognition, 14 (4), 698–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2005.06.004
Bruers, S., & Braeckman, J. (2014). A review and systematization of the trolley problem. Philosophia, 42 (2), 251–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-013-9507-5
Bryant, B. K. (1982). An index of empathy for children and adolescents. Child Development, 53 (2), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.2307/1128984
Burghart, M., & Mier, D. (2022). No feelings for me, no feelings for you: A meta-analysis on alexithymia and empathy in psychopathy. Personality and Individual Differences, 194, 111658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111658
Choe, S. Y., & Min, K. H. (2011). Who makes utilitarian judgments? The influences of emotions on utilitarian judgments. Judgment and Decision Making, 6 (7), 580–592. https://doi.org/10.1017/S193029750000262X
Crowell, S. E., Beauchaine, T. P., & Linehan, M. M. (2009). A biosocial developmental model of borderline personality: Elaborating and extending Linehan’s theory. Psychological Bulletin, 135 (3), 495–510. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015616
D’Ambrosio, F., Olivier, M., Didon, D., & Besche, C. (2009). The basic empathy scale: A French validation of a measure of empathy in youth. Personality and Individual Differences, 46 (2), 160–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.09.020
Decety, J. (2021). Why empathy is not a reliable source of information in moral decision making. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 30 (5), 425–430. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214211031943
Decety, J., & Cowell, J. M. (2014). Friends or foes: Is empathy necessary for moral behavior? Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 9 (5), 525–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614545130
Decety, J., & Cowell, J. M. (2015). Empathy, justice, and moral behavior. AJOB Neuroscience, 6 (3), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/21507740.2015.1047055
DeShong, H. L., Mullins-Sweatt, S. N., Miller, J. D., Widiger, T. A., & Lynam, D. R. (2016). Development of a short form of the five-factor borderline inventory. Assessment, 23 (3), 342–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191115581475
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39 (2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley.
Foot, P. (Ed.). (1967). The problem of abortion and the doctrine of the double effect. In Virtues and vices and other essays in moral philosophy (pp. 19–32). Basil Blackwell.
Friesdorf, R., Conway, P., & Gawronski, B. (2015). Gender differences in responses to moral dilemmas: A process dissociation analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41 (5), 696–713. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215575731
Fumagalli, M., Ferrucci, R., Mameli, F., Marceglia, S., Mrakic-Sposta, S., Zago, S., Lucchiari, C., Consonni, D., Nordio, F., Pravettoni, G., & Cappa, S. (2010a). Gender-related differences in moral judgments. Cognitive Processing, 11 (3), 219–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-009-0335-2
Fumagalli, M., Vergari, M., Pasqualetti, P., Marceglia, S., Mameli, F., Ferrucci, R., Mrakic-Sposta, S., Zago, S., Sartori, G., Pravettoni, G., Barbieri, S., Cappa, S., & Priori, A. (2010b). Brain switches utilitarian behavior: Does gender make the difference? PLoS One, 5 (1), e8865. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0008865
Gallucci, M. (2019). GAMLj: General analyses for linear models. [Jamovi module]. Scribbr. https://gamlj.github.io/.
Gleichgerrcht, E., & Young, L. (2013). Low levels of empathic concern predict utilitarian moral judgment. PloS One, 8 (4), e60418. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060418
Greene, J. D. (2007). Why are VMPFC patients more utilitarian? A dual-process theory of moral judgment explains. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11 (8), 322–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.06.004
Greene, J. D., Morelli, S. A., Lowenberg, K., Nystrom, L. E., & Cohen, J. D. (2008). Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment. Cognition, 107 (3), 1144–1154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.11.004
Greene, J. D., Nystrom, L. E., Engell, A. D., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). The neural bases of cognitive conflict and control in moral judgment. Neuron, 44 (2), 389–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2004.09.027
Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science (New York, N.Y.), 293 (5537), 2105–2108. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1062872
Hare, R. D. (1993). Without conscience: The disturbing world of the psychopaths among us. Simon & Schuster (Pocket Books).
Hare, R. D. (1996). Psychopathy: A clinical construct whose time has come. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23 (1), 25–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854896023001004
Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. S. (2009). Psychopathy: Assessment and forensic implications. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Revue Canadienne De Psychiatrie, 54 (12), 791–802. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370905401202
Hauser, M., Cushman, F., Young, L., Kang‐Xing Jin, R., & Mikhail, J. (2007). A dissociation between moral judgments and justifications. Mind & Language, 22 (1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2006.00297.x
Herpertz, S. C., Werth, U., Lukas, G., Qunaibi, M., Schuerkens, A., Kunert, H. J., Freese, R., Flesch, M., Mueller-Isberner, R., Osterheider, M., & Sass, H. (2001). Emotion in criminal offenders with psychopathy and borderline personality disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry, 58 (8), 737–745. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.58.8.737
Hogan, R. (1969). Development of an empathy scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 33 (3), 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027580
Horne, Z., & Powell, D. (2016). How large is the role of emotion in judgments of moral dilemmas? PloS One, 11 (7), e0154780. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154780
Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. (1986). A general theory of marketing ethics. Journal of Macromarketing, 6 (1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/027614678600600103
Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2006). Development and validation of the basic empathy scale. Journal of Adolescence, 29 (4), 589–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.08.010
Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. The Academy of Management Review, 16 (2), 366–395. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4278958
Kahneman, D. (2013). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). The psychology of preferences. Scientific American, 246 (1), 160–173. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24966506 https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0182-160
Leichsenring, F., Leibing, E., Kruse, J., New, A. S., & Leweke, F. (2011). Borderline personality disorder. Lancet (London, England), 377 (9759), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61422-5
Lotto, L., Manfrinati, A., & Sarlo, M. (2014). A new set of moral dilemmas: Norms for moral acceptability, decision times, and emotional salience. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 27 (1), 57–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1782
Nasello, J. A., Blavier, A., & Triffaux, J. M. (2023). French adaptation of the Five-Factor Borderline Inventory-Short Form. Current Psychology, 42, 5886–5897. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01878-2
Nasello, J. A., Dardenne, B., Blavier, A., & Triffaux, J. M. (2021). Does empathy predict decision-making in everyday trolley-like problems? Current Psychology, 42 (4), 2966–2979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01566-1
Navarrete, C. D., McDonald, M. M., Mott, M. L., & Asher, B. (2012). Virtual morality: Emotion and action in a simulated three-dimensional “trolley problem. Emotion (Washington, D.C.), 12 (2), 364–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025561
Patil, I., & Silani, G. (2014). Reduced empathic concern leads to utilitarian moral judgments in trait alexithymia. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 501. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00501
Peckham, A. D., Jones, P., Snorrason, I., Wessman, I., Beard, C., & Björgvinsson, T. (2020). Age-related differences in borderline personality disorder symptom networks in a transdiagnostic sample. Journal of Affective Disorders, 274, 508–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.05.111
Pletti, C., Lotto, L., Buodo, G., & Sarlo, M. (2017). It’s immoral, but I’d do it! Psychopathy traits affect decision-making in sacrificial dilemmas and in everyday moral situations. British Journal of Psychology (London, England: 1953), 108 (2), 351–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12205
Richetin, J., Preti, E., Costantini, G., & De Panfilis, C. (2017). The centrality of affective instability and identity in Borderline Personality Disorder: Evidence from network analysis. PloS One, 12 (10), e0186695. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186695
Robinson, E. V., & Rogers, R. (2015). Empathy faking in psychopathic offenders: The vulnerability of empathy measures. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 37 (4), 545–552. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-015-9479-9
Salgado, R. M., Pedrosa, R., & Bastos-Leite, A. J. (2020). Dysfunction of empathy and related processes in borderline personality disorder: A systematic review. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 28 (4), 238–254. https://doi.org/10.1097/HRP.0000000000000260
Sandoval, A. M. R., Hancock, D., Poythress, N., Edens, J. F., & Lilienfeld, S. (2000). Construct validity of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory in a correctional sample. Journal of Personality Assessment, 74 (2), 262–281. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA7402_7
Saunders, K. E., Goodwin, G. M., & Rogers, R. D. (2015). Borderline personality disorder, but not euthymic bipolar disorder, is associated with a failure to sustain reciprocal cooperative behaviour: Implications for spectrum models of mood disorders. Psychological Medicine, 45 (8), 1591–1600. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291714002475
Smillie, L. D., Katic, M., & Laham, S. M. (2021). Personality and moral judgment: Curious consequentialists and polite deontologists. Journal of Personality, 89 (3), 549–564. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12598
Smith, K. E., Norman, G. J., & Decety, J. (2017). The complexity of empathy during medical school training: Evidence for positive changes. Medical Education, 51 (11), 1146–1159. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13398
Southward, M. W., & Cheavens, J. S. (2018). Identifying core deficits in a dimensional model of borderline personality disorder features: A network analysis. Clinical Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 6 (5), 685–703. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702618769560
Svenson, O. (1992). Differentiation and consolidation theory of human decision making: A frame of reference for the study of pre-and post-decision processes. Acta Psychologica, 80 (1-3), 143–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(92)90044-E
Svenson, O. (1996). Decision making and the search for fundamental psychological regularities: What can be learned from a process perspective? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65 (3), 252–267. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.0026
Takamatsu, R. (2018). Turning off the empathy switch: Lower empathic concern for the victim leads to utilitarian choices of action. PloS One, 13 (9), e0203826. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203826.
Takamatsu, R. (2019). Personality correlates and utilitarian judgments in the everyday context: Psychopathic traits and differential effects of empathy, social dominance orientation, and dehumanization beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 146, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.03.029
The Jamovi Project. (2019). Jamovi, version 1.6.23 [Computer Software]. Scribbr. https://www.jamovi.org
Thomson, J. J. (1976). Killing, letting die, and the trolley problem. The Monist, 59 (2), 204–217. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27902416 https://doi.org/10.5840/monist197659224
Van Dongen, J. D. (2020). The empathic brain of psychopaths: From social science to neuroscience in empathy. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 695. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00695
Vyas, K., Jameel, L., Bellesi, G., Crawford, S., & Channon, S. (2017). Derailing the trolley: Everyday utilitarian judgments in groups high versus low in psychopathic traits or autistic traits. Psychiatry Research, 250, 84–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2017.01.054
