scholarly journals Human decision-making biases in the moral dilemmas of autonomous vehicles

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Darius-Aurel Frank ◽  
Polymeros Chrysochou ◽  
Panagiotis Mitkidis ◽  
Dan Ariely
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Autonomous Vehicles ◽  
Moral Dilemmas ◽  
Situational Factors ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Personal Perspective ◽  
Moral Code ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Moral Decisions ◽  
Human Decision

Abstract The development of artificial intelligence has led researchers to study the ethical principles that should guide machine behavior. The challenge in building machine morality based on people’s moral decisions, however, is accounting for the biases in human moral decision-making. In seven studies, this paper investigates how people’s personal perspectives and decision-making modes affect their decisions in the moral dilemmas faced by autonomous vehicles. Moreover, it determines the variations in people’s moral decisions that can be attributed to the situational factors of the dilemmas. The reported studies demonstrate that people’s moral decisions, regardless of the presented dilemma, are biased by their decision-making mode and personal perspective. Under intuitive moral decisions, participants shift more towards a deontological doctrine by sacrificing the passenger instead of the pedestrian. In addition, once the personal perspective is made salient participants preserve the lives of that perspective, i.e. the passenger shifts towards sacrificing the pedestrian, and vice versa. These biases in people’s moral decisions underline the social challenge in the design of a universal moral code for autonomous vehicles. We discuss the implications of our findings and provide directions for future research.

Fear Deciding Fate: How Fear Influences Moral Decision-Making

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Sophia Strojny
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Moral Dilemmas ◽  
Thinking Styles ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Moral Choice ◽  
Moral Decisions ◽  
Moral Choices ◽  
The Impact

<p>Moral dilemmas require individuals to make a life-altering choice. Due to the severity of the choice, we argue that there is a degree of fear in moral decision-making. We aimed to see how prevailing fears in each individual predicts moral decision-making habits. We looked into the emotional and physical divisions of fear to deem which dimension of fear is more dominant in each participant. Then analysed these results against reported deontological or utilitarian moral inclinations to see if higher reports of fear impact moral decision-making. Additionally, we included two secondary variables that are most prevalent in fear research (gender and thinking styles) as well as the impact of burden on moral choice. We found that our research was supported; fear tendencies are linked to individual behaviours and burden of moral decisions was influenced by what we fear and affected moral choices.</p>

scholarly journals Political Dogma Stroll’s non political moral decision making

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 33-44
Author(s):  
Ibrahim Noorani ◽  
Khurram Shakir ◽  
Muddasir Hussain
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
Moral Dilemmas ◽  
Preliminary Evidence ◽  
Emotional Reactions ◽  
Affective Responses ◽  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Moral Decisions

Ethical enigma kernelling concerns about actions against concerns about consequences have been dealt by philosophers and psychologists to measure “universal” moral intuitions. Although these enigmas contain no evident political content, we decipher that liberals are more likely than conservatives to be concerned about consequences, whereas conservatives are more likely than liberals to be concerned about actions. This denouement is exhibited in two large, heterogeneous samples and across several different moral dilemmas. In addition, manipulations of dilemma averseness and order of presentation suggest that this political difference is due in part to different sensitivities to emotional reactions in moral decision-making: Conservatives are very much inclined to “go with the gut” and let affective responses guide moral judgments, while liberals are more likely to deliberate about optimal consequences. In this article, extracting a sample from Western Europe, we report evidence that political differences can be found in moral decisions about issues that have no evident political content. In particular, we find that conservatives are more likely than liberals to attend to the action itself when deciding whether something is right or wrong, whereas liberals are more likely than conservatives to attend to the consequences of the action. Further, we report preliminary evidence that this is partly explained by the kernel of truth from the parodies – conservatives are more likely than liberals to “go with the gut” by using their affective responses to guide moral judgment.

scholarly journals MORAL DECISION-MAKING DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC

2020 ◽  
pp. 22-43
Author(s):  
Sergey N. Enikolopov ◽  
Tatina I. Medvedeva ◽  
Olga M. Boyko ◽  
Oksana Yu. Vorontsova ◽  
Olga Yu. Kazmina
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Moral Dilemmas ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Psychopathological Symptoms ◽  
Moral Decisions ◽  
Moral Choices ◽  
High Level

Relevance. The COVID-19 pandemic reveals the problem of moral choices for a large number of people: who should be treated first; who can be considered as a subject for urgent vaccines and drugs testing; choice between personal convenience and observation of restrictions for the sake of the “common good.” The objective of the study was to evaluate whether the stress experienced by people during the COVID-19 pandemic can change moral decision making. Materials and methods. The data of an online survey conducted from March 30 to May 31 (311 people) were analyzed. The survey included sociodemographic questions, questions about assessing one’s current condition, the Simptom Check List-90-Revised (SCL-90-R), and the Moral Dilemmas Test, consisting of 30 dilemmas. The relationship of a number of utilitarian choices in personal moral dilemmas with sociodemographic characteristics, respondents’ assessments of their state and psychopathological characteristics was analyzed. Solving personal moral dilemmas was considered within subgroups of respondents with a high level of somatization and a high level of psychopathological symptoms and it was reviewed separately. Results. The results showed a high level of distress throughout the survey and an increase of utilitarian choices in personal moral dilemmas by the end of the survey. The number of choices in personal dilemmas was lower among older respondents, higher among men, and positively correlated with psychopathological symptoms. In the subgroup with a high level of somatization, personal choices slightly decreased by the end of the survey. On the contrary, in the subgroup with high levels of psychopathological symptoms, the number of personal choices significantly increased. Conclusions. Against the background of quarantine, assessments of moral standards change. The level of stress ambiguously affects moral decisions. A high level of somatization leads to a decrease in utilitarian personal choices, and a higher level of psychopathological symptoms leads to an increase in utilitarianш choices. Utilitarian personal choices are more often made by men and younger people

Why Empathy Is Not a Reliable Source of Information in Moral Decision Making

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 425-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Decety
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Situational Factors ◽  
Societal Implications ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Social Signals ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Moral Decisions ◽  
Reliable Source ◽  
Source Of Information

Although empathy drives prosocial behaviors, it is not always a reliable source of information in moral decision making. In this essay, I integrate evolutionary theory, behavioral economics, psychology, and social neuroscience to demonstrate why and how empathy is unconsciously and rapidly modulated by various social signals and situational factors. This theoretical framework explains why decision making that relies solely on empathy is not ideal and can, at times, erode ethical values. This perspective has social and societal implications and can be used to reduce cognitive biases and guide moral decisions.

scholarly journals EXPRESS: Reliability of Moral Decision Making: Evidence from the Trolley Dilemma

2021 ◽  
pp. 174702182110015
Author(s):  
Corentin J Gosling ◽  
Bastien Trémolière
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Framing Effects ◽  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Moral Decisions ◽  
Equivalence Tests ◽  
Trolley Dilemma

The application of framing effects in the field of moral judgment has offered a golden opportunity to assess the reliability of people’s moral judgments and decisions. To date, however, these studies are still scarce and they suffer from multiple methodological issues. Therefore, the present study aims to provide further insights into the reliability of moral judgments while fixing these methodological shortcomings. In the current study, we employed the classic trolley dilemma moral decision-making paradigm to determine the extent to which moral decisions are susceptible to framing effects. A total of 1040 participants were included in the study. The data revealed that choices of participants did not significantly differ between the two frames. Equivalence tests confirmed that the associated effect size was very small. Further exploratory analyses revealed an unplanned interaction between the framing effect and the target of the framing manipulation. This result became from marginally statistically significant to insignificant following different sensitivity analyses. The implications and limitations of these findings and directions for future research are discussed.

Fear Deciding Fate: How Fear Influences Moral Decision-Making

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Sophia Strojny
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Moral Dilemmas ◽  
Thinking Styles ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Moral Choice ◽  
Moral Decisions ◽  
Moral Choices ◽  
The Impact

<p>Moral dilemmas require individuals to make a life-altering choice. Due to the severity of the choice, we argue that there is a degree of fear in moral decision-making. We aimed to see how prevailing fears in each individual predicts moral decision-making habits. We looked into the emotional and physical divisions of fear to deem which dimension of fear is more dominant in each participant. Then analysed these results against reported deontological or utilitarian moral inclinations to see if higher reports of fear impact moral decision-making. Additionally, we included two secondary variables that are most prevalent in fear research (gender and thinking styles) as well as the impact of burden on moral choice. We found that our research was supported; fear tendencies are linked to individual behaviours and burden of moral decisions was influenced by what we fear and affected moral choices.</p>

scholarly journals Who cares about the outgroup? Political ideology, empathy, and moral decision-making

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arathy Puthillam ◽  
Hansika Kapoor
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
Moral Dilemma ◽  
Hierarchical Structures ◽  
Moral Dilemmas ◽  
Reactivity Index ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Group Setting ◽  
Moral Decisions

Conservatives are known to display smaller moral circles, have less empathy, and make utilitarian decisions. The present study aimed to understand the relationships between political ideology and empathetic concern (n = 513), and between ideology and moral decision-making (n = 210) in an inter-group setting, using an Indian sample. We measured trait empathetic concern and empathetic concern for the ingroup (i.e., their own religion) and outgroup (i.e., Muslims) using the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, and measured moral decision-making for a non-denominational group and in- and out-group using modified moral dilemmas. We found that right-leaning individuals, in terms of greater adherence to cultural norms, displayed higher levels of trait empathetic concern, as well as that for in- and outgroups; they were also more willing to sacrifice the outgroup to save multiple ingroup members in moral dilemma tasks, and thus made utilitarian moral decisions when sacrificing outgroup lives were concerned. Additionally, those leaning left, in terms of lower adherence to hierarchical structures, showed higher levels of empathetic concern for the outgroup. Implications and future avenues are discussed.

scholarly journals Reliability of Moral Decision Making: Evidence from the Trolley Dilemma

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bastien Trémolière ◽  
Corentin J Gosling
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Framing Effects ◽  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Moral Decision ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Moral Decisions ◽  
Equivalence Tests ◽  
Trolley Dilemma

The application of framing effects in the field of moral judgment has offered a golden opportunity to assess the reliability of people’s moral judgments and decisions. To date, however, these studies are still scarce and they suffer from multiple methodological issues. Therefore, the present study aims to provide further insights into the reliability of moral judgments while fixing these methodological shortcomings. In the current study, we employed the classic trolley dilemma moral decision-making paradigm to determine the extent to which moral decisions are susceptible to framing effects. A total of 1040 participants were included in the study. The data revealed that choices of participants did not significantly differ between the two frames. Equivalence tests confirmed that the associated effect size was very small. Further exploratory analyses revealed an unplanned interaction between the framing effect and the target of the framing manipulation. This result became from marginally statistically significant to insignificant following different sensitivity analyses. The implications and limitations of these findings and directions for future research are discussed.

scholarly journals THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PSYCHOTHERAPIST’S MORAL DECISIONS AND EMOTIONS, PERSONALITY FEATURES

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (60) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Moral Dilemmas ◽  
Psychology Students ◽  
Empathic Concern ◽  
Moral Code ◽  
Process Dissociation ◽  
Ethical Decisions ◽  
Moral Decisions ◽  
Personality Features ◽  
The Relationship

In clinical psychology literature, the topic of ethical decisions is limited to a couple of descriptive studies, with an exception of a single local study, exploring the conflicting issues that arise despite the existence of a professional moral code. Moreover, these studies investigated only demographic factors such as age, gender, experience etc., as possible correlates of these ethical decisions, but failed to propose consistent and meaningful results. The aim of the present study was to explore the relationship between psychotherapists’ ethical decisions – emotions and personal tendencies. The deontological/utilitarian decision-making tendencies of psychotherapists in psychotherapist moral dilemmas were compared with those of undergraduate psychology students. The relationship between deontological/utilitarian decision-making tendencies and frequently used personality features in international moral psychology studies such as empathic concern, psychopathy, analytical thinking and altruistic utilitarianism was explored as well as the correlation between negative mood of the participants and deontological decision-making tendencies. Regarding both conventional and process dissociation analyses, research results revealed that there wasn’t a significant relationship between mood of the participants in both groups and their deontological/utilitarian decision- making tendencies. Psychotherapists’ deontological decision-making tendency was found to be higher than that of the students. Two groups were not differentiated on the basis of empathic concern but psychology students’ both Machiavellist and antisocial tendencies were higher those the psychotherapists. Furthermore, the results indicated that investigated personality variables were not correlated with utilitarian/deontological decision-making tendencies in general independent of the calculation method used. These results seemed to indicate that the personality features related to moral decisions in these scenarios would be different than those of the classical moral dilemmas and further research is needed to explore these personality features. Key Words: Psychotherapist moral dilemmas, deontology, utilitarianism, process dissociation analysis

scholarly journals Sleeping over moral dilemmas modulates utilitarian decision-making

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola Cellini ◽  
Marco Mercurio ◽  
Michela Sarlo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Emotional Reactivity ◽  
Moral Dilemmas ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Emotional Processes ◽  
Moral Decisions ◽  
Decision Choices ◽  
Valence And Arousal ◽  
Over Time

AbstractMoral decision-making depends on the interaction between emotional and cognitive control processes, which are also affected by sleep. Here we aimed to assess the potential role of sleep in the modulation of moral decisions over time by testing the change in behavioral responses to moral dilemmas over time (1 week). Thirty-five young adults were tested twice, with one week between the sessions. In each session, participants were presented with 24 sacrificial (12 Footbridge- and 12 Trolley-type) and 6 everyday-type moral dilemmas. In sacrificial dilemmas, participants had to choose whether or not to kill one person to save more people (utilitarian choice), to judge how morally acceptable the proposed solution was, and how they felt in terms of valence and arousal during the decision. In everyday-type dilemmas, they had to decide whether to pursuit moral violations involving dishonest behavior. Between the sessions, the participants’ sleep pattern was assessed via actigraphy. We observed that participants reduced the utilitarian choices in the second session, and this effect was more pronounced for the Trolley-type dilemmas. We also showed that after a week participants judged the utilitarian choices as less morally acceptable, but there was no change in self-reported emotional reactivity (i.e., valence, and arousal). Moreover, sleep efficiency was mildly negatively associated with the changes in decision choices and moral acceptability for the Footbridge-type dilemmas. Taken together, our data suggest that dealing with a moral situation engages several interacting factors that seem to go beyond the competing roles of cognitive and emotional processes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document