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

References

• 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
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batson, C. D. (2011). Altruism in humans. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bryant, B. K. (1982). An index of empathy for children and adolescents. Child Development, 53(2), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.2307/1128984
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 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
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• 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.
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Google Scholar
• Gallucci, M. (2019). GAMLj: General analyses for linear models. [Jamovi module]. Scribbr. https://gamlj.github.io/.
   Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hare, R. D. (1993). Without conscience: The disturbing world of the psychopaths among us. Simon & Schuster (Pocket Books).
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hogan, R. (1969). Development of an empathy scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 33(3), 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027580
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. (2013). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Jamovi Project. (2019). Jamovi, version 1.6.23 [Computer Software]. Scribbr. https://www.jamovi.org
   Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar