Aaron
A. Duke and Laurent Bègueb
Cognition
Volume 134, January 2015, Pages 121–127
Highlights
•
Greene’s dual-process theory of moral reasoning needs revision.
•
Blood alcohol concentration is positively correlated with utilitarianism.
•
Self-reported disinhibition is positively correlated with utilitarianism.
•
Decreased empathy predicts utilitarianism better than increased deliberation.
Abstract
The
hypothetical moral dilemma known as the trolley problem has become a
methodological cornerstone in the psychological study of moral reasoning and
yet, there remains considerable debate as to the meaning of utilitarian
responding in these scenarios. It is unclear whether utilitarian responding
results primarily from increased deliberative reasoning capacity or from
decreased aversion to harming others. In order to clarify this question, we conducted
two field studies to examine the effects of alcohol intoxication on utilitarian
responding. Alcohol holds promise in clarifying the above debate because it
impairs both social cognition (i.e., empathy) and higher-order executive
functioning. Hence, the direction of the association between alcohol and
utilitarian vs. non-utilitarian responding should inform the relative
importance of both deliberative and social processing systems in influencing
utilitarian preference. In two field studies with a combined sample of 103 men
and women recruited at two bars in Grenoble, France, participants were
presented with a moral dilemma assessing their willingness to sacrifice one
life to save five others. Participants’ blood alcohol concentrations were found
to positively correlate with utilitarian preferences (r = .31, p < .001)
suggesting a stronger role for impaired social cognition than intact
deliberative reasoning in predicting utilitarian responses in the trolley
dilemma. Implications for Greene’s dual-process model of moral reasoning are
discussed.
