Review of Philosophy and Psychology 4 (4):705-714 (2013)
AbstractMoral psychologists have shown that people’s past moral experiences can affect their subsequent moral decisions. One prominent finding in this line of research is that when people make a judgment about the Trolley dilemma after considering the Footbridge dilemma, they are significantly less likely to decide it is acceptable to redirect a train to save five people. Additionally, this ordering effect is asymmetrical, as making a judgment about the Trolley dilemma has little to no effect on people’s judgments about the Footbridge dilemma. We argue that this asymmetry is the result of a difference in how each dilemma affects people’s beliefs about the importance of saving lives. In two experiments, we show that considering the Footbridge dilemma disconfirms these beliefs, while considering the Trolley dilemma does not significantly affect them. Consistent with predictions of sequential learning models, our findings offer a clear and parsimonious account of the asymmetry in the ordering effect
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Expertise in Moral Reasoning? Order Effects on Moral Judgment in Professional Philosophers and Non‐Philosophers.Eric Schwitzgebel & Fiery Cushman - 2012 - Mind and Language 27 (2):135-153.
Moral Intuitions: Are Philosophers Experts?Kevin Tobia, Wesley Buckwalter & Stephen Stich - 2013 - Philosophical Psychology 26 (5):629-638.
Putting the Trolley in Order: Experimental Philosophy and the Loop Case.S. Matthew Liao, Alex Wiegmann, Joshua Alexander & Gerard Vong - 2012 - Philosophical Psychology 25 (5):661-671.
Citations of this work
Moral Discourse Boosts Confidence in Moral Judgments.Nora Heinzelmann, Benedikt Höltgen & Viet Tran - 2021 - Philosophical Psychology 34.
Debunking Rationalist Defenses of Common-Sense Ontology: An Empirical Approach.Robert Carry Osborne - 2016 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 7 (1):197-221.
Transfer Effects Between Moral Dilemmas: A Causal Model Theory.Alex Wiegmann & Michael R. Waldmann - 2014 - Cognition 131 (1):28-43.
Ordering Effects, Updating Effects, and the Specter of Global Skepticism.Zachary Horne & Jonathan Livengood - 2017 - Synthese 194 (4):1189-1218.
A Single Counterexample Leads to Moral Belief Revision.Zachary Horne, Derek Powell & John Hummel - 2015 - Cognitive Science 39 (8):1950-1964.
Similar books and articles
A Closer Look at Moral Dilemmas: Latent Dimensions of Morality and the Difference Between Trolley and Footbridge Dilemmas.Kuninori Nakamura - 2013 - Thinking and Reasoning 19 (2):178-204.
Chinese and Westerners Respond Differently to the Trolley Dilemmas.Henrik Ahlenius & Torbjörn Tännsjö - 2012 - Journal of Cognition and Culture 12 (3-4):195-201.
Expressivism and Moral Dilemmas: A Response to Marino.Carl Baker - 2011 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (4):445-455.
The Moral Theory Behind Moral Dilemmas.Alex Rajczi - 2002 - American Philosophical Quarterly 39 (4):373-383.
The Construction of Moral Dilemmas in Everyday Life.Gillian R. Wark & Dennis L. Krebs - 2000 - Journal of Moral Education 29 (1):5-21.
A Behavioral Disinhibition Hypothesis of Interventions in Moral Dilemmas.Kees van den Bos, Patrick A. Müller & Tom Damen - 2011 - Emotion Review 3 (3):281-283.
When Can One Requirement Override Another?Alex Rajczi - 2002 - Philosophical Studies 108 (3):309 - 326.
Cheating: Reflections on a Moral Dilemma.D. Kay Johnston - 1991 - Journal of Moral Education 20 (3):283-291.
Two Types of Moral Dilemma.John R. Welch - 2001 - In Matti Häyry & Tuija Takala (eds.), The Future of Value Inquiry. Rodopi.
Studying Moral Reasoning in Business Settings: A New Methodological Approach.Elaine Mcgivern & James Weber - 2006 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 17:18-23.