The effects of explicit reasoning on moral judgements

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Psychology
• Moral Psychology
• Behavioral Economics

Background:

• Moral judgments are influenced by both emotional intuition and explicit reasoning.
• The trolley problem, in its 'footbridge' and 'switch' variations, is a key tool for studying moral decision-making.
• Understanding how reasoning, particularly counter-attitudinal reasoning, impacts moral judgments is crucial for cognitive and moral psychology.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the impact of explicit reasoning, specifically counter-attitudinal reasoning, on moral judgments in different versions of the trolley problem.
• To examine whether the timing of counter-attitudinal reasoning and moral judgment influences the outcome.
• To determine if the strength of moral intuition associated with a dilemma moderates the effect of reasoning on judgment.

Main Methods:

• Four experiments were conducted, involving participants responding to either the 'footbridge' or 'switch' trolley problem.
• Participants were exposed to different reasoning conditions: control, counter-attitudinal, pro-attitudinal, and mixed reasoning.
• Experiments 3-4 manipulated the timing of reasoning and judgment, including delays, to assess their interaction with dilemma type.

Main Results:

• Counter-attitudinal reasoning led to less typical moral judgments, particularly in the 'switch' dilemma, and this effect was strongest when reasoning preceded a delay.
• The impact of counter-attitudinal reasoning was less pronounced in the 'footbridge' dilemma, which elicits stronger moral intuitions.
• Neither pro-attitudinal reasoning nor delayed judgments, in isolation, significantly altered participants' moral judgments.

Conclusions:

• Individuals appear open to modifying their moral judgments when exposed to opposing viewpoints, especially in dilemmas with weaker initial moral intuitions.
• The strength of inherent moral intuition in a dilemma plays a significant role in moderating the influence of counter-attitudinal reasoning.
• The findings highlight the complex interplay between reasoning, intuition, and context in shaping moral decision-making.