Literature DB >> 28301177

Trust, trolleys and social dilemmas: A replication study.

Dries H Bostyn1, Arne Roets1.   

Abstract

The present manuscript addresses how perceived trustworthiness of cooperative partners in a social dilemma context is influenced by the moral judgments those partners make on Trolley-type moral dilemmas; an issue recently investigated by Everett, Pizarro, and Crockett (2016). The present research comprises 2 studies that were conducted independently, simultaneously with, and incognizant of the Everett studies. Whereas the present studies aimed at investigating the same research hypothesis, a different and more elaborate methodology was used, as such providing a conceptual replication opportunity and extension to the Everett et al. STUDIES: Overall, the present studies clearly confirmed the main finding of Everett et al., that deontologists are more trusted than consequentialists in social dilemma games. Study 1 replicates Everett et al.'s effect in the context of trust games. Study 2 generalizes the effect to public goods games, thus demonstrating that it is not specific to the type of social dilemma game used in Everett et al. Finally, both studies build on these results by demonstrating that the increased trust in deontologists may sometimes, but not always, be warranted: deontologists displayed increased cooperation rates but only in the public goods game and not in trust games. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28301177     DOI: 10.1037/xge0000295

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  7 in total

1.  Bright mind, moral mind? Intelligence is unrelated to consequentialist moral judgment in sacrificial moral dilemmas.

Authors:  D H Bostyn; J De Keersmaecker; J Van Assche; A Roets
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2020-04

2.  Trolley Dilemma in Papua. Yali horticulturalists refuse to pull the lever.

Authors:  Piotr Sorokowski; Michalina Marczak; Michał Misiak; Michał Białek
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2020-04

Review 3.  Using the VIA Classification to Advance a Psychological Science of Virtue.

Authors:  Robert E McGrath; Mitch Brown
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-12-07

Review 4.  (Mis)perceiving cooperativeness.

Authors:  Charlotte S L Rossetti; Christian Hilbe; Oliver P Hauser
Journal:  Curr Opin Psychol       Date:  2021-07-09

5.  Moral dilemmas and trust in leaders during a global health crisis.

Authors:  Jim A C Everett; Clara Colombatto; Edmond Awad; Paulo Boggio; Björn Bos; William J Brady; Megha Chawla; Vladimir Chituc; Dongil Chung; Moritz A Drupp; Srishti Goel; Brit Grosskopf; Frederik Hjorth; Alissa Ji; Caleb Kealoha; Judy S Kim; Yangfei Lin; Yina Ma; Michel André Maréchal; Federico Mancinelli; Christoph Mathys; Asmus L Olsen; Graeme Pearce; Annayah M B Prosser; Niv Reggev; Nicholas Sabin; Julien Senn; Yeon Soon Shin; Walter Sinnott-Armstrong; Hallgeir Sjåstad; Madelijn Strick; Sunhae Sul; Lars Tummers; Monique Turner; Hongbo Yu; Yoonseo Zoh; Molly J Crockett
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2021-07-01

6.  The costs of being consequentialist: Social inference from instrumental harm and impartial beneficence.

Authors:  Jim A C Everett; Nadira S Faber; Julian Savulescu; Molly J Crockett
Journal:  J Exp Soc Psychol       Date:  2018-11

7.  People making deontological judgments in the Trapdoor dilemma are perceived to be more prosocial in economic games than they actually are.

Authors:  Valerio Capraro; Jonathan Sippel; Bonan Zhao; Levin Hornischer; Morgan Savary; Zoi Terzopoulou; Pierre Faucher; Simone F Griffioen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.