Moral Decision-Making in Trolley Problems and Variants: How Do Participants’ Perspectives, Borderline Personality Traits, and Empathy Predict Choices?

Abstract

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.

Keywords:

• Moral judgment
• moral development
• perspective-taking
• psychopathology
• personality

Acknowledgments

We thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.

Disclosure Statement

The authors report that there are no competing interests to declare.

Fundings Details

This research received no specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments, and the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Principles in the Conduct of Research with Human Participants (2010). The ethical committee of the Department of Psychology of the University of Liège (Belgium) approved the study, reference n°: 1920-92.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained online from all participants included in the study.

Online Data

The online data file is available on the following DOI link: 10.17605/OSF.IO/T4H7F.

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1 We conducted a pilot experiment (N = 24; 17 women; M_age = 26.5; SD = 5.32) to pretest four everyday trolley-like problems (i.e., the dilemmas of the company, the inheritance, the university, and the roommates) and chose the company’s dilemma because: (1) it was rated as as sufficiently immersive and realistic; (2) participants found it highly distressing, and their choices caused them to feel tormented and concerned; (3) participants rated it as presenting low levels of escape (i.e., elements in the scenario that favor one option over the other). Batson et al. (1981) showed that the ease of escape influences helping behaviors in specific empathic conditions. Moreover, (4) participants reported experiencing a wide range of emotions while reading the scenario (i.e., they felt ashamed, anxious, frustrated, disgusted, nervous, and attentive); and (5) they did not find the scenario amusing at all. Taken together, these elements addressed the criticisms raised by Bauman et al. (2014).

2 Another potential explanation for the high percentage of GOD responders among participants with Perspective B could have been the presence of suicidal thoughts, particularly among those with higher levels of BDL traits. However, several factors make this explanation unlikely. First, all participants reported no history of psychiatric or neurological issues. Second, their scores in BDL traits were within the normal range (Mdn = 115; SD = 25). Third, BDL traits did not significantly predict moral decision-making in Perspective B, ruling out this interpretation.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Julian A. Nasello

Julian A. Nasello is a Ph.D. student at the University of Liège, and his research mainly focuses on the role of empathy in moral decision-making and medical education.

Benoit Dardenne

Benoit Dardenne is a social psychology professor at the University of Liège, and his research interests include the role of environment, sexism, and ageism stereotypes in social behaviors.

Michel Hansenne

Michel Hansenne is a professor at the University of Liège in the psychology department, and he specializes in the study of personality and individual differences.

Adélaïde Blavier

Adélaïde Blavier is a professor at the University of Liège in the psychology department. She has expertise in clinical psychology, especially in psychotraumas, and also works as a forensic psychologist. Her research interests focus on stress and trauma.

Jean-Marc Triffaux

Jean-Marc Triffaux is a professor at the University of Liège in the department of medicine. He is a clinician psychiatrist and the medical director of the Psychiatric Day Hospital “La Clé.” His research interests mainly focus on the role of empathy in medical care and education.