Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2381/28735
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGold, Natalie-
dc.contributor.authorColman, Andrew M.-
dc.contributor.authorPulford, Briony D.-
dc.date.accessioned2014-04-09T09:38:34Z-
dc.date.available2014-04-09T09:38:34Z-
dc.date.issued2014-01-01-
dc.identifier.citationJudgment and Decision Making, 2014, 9 (1), pp. 65 - 76en
dc.identifier.issn1930-2975-
dc.identifier.urihttp://journal.sjdm.org/vol9.1.htmlen
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2381/28735-
dc.description.abstractTrolley problems have been used in the development of moral theory and the psychological study of moral judgments and behavior. Most of this research has focused on people from the West, with implicit assumptions that moral intuitions should generalize and that moral psychology is universal. However, cultural differences may be associated with differences in moral judgments and behavior. We operationalized a trolley problem in the laboratory, with economic incentives and real-life consequences, and compared British and Chinese samples on moral behavior and judgment. We found that Chinese participants were less willing to sacrifice one person to save five others, and less likely to consider such an action to be right. In a second study using three scenarios, including the standard scenario where lives are threatened by an on-coming train, fewer Chinese than British participants were willing to take action and sacrifice one to save five, and this cultural difference was more pronounced when the consequences were less severe than death.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherSociety of Judgment and Decision Makingen
dc.rightsCopyright © the authors, 2014. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.en
dc.subjectSocial Sciencesen
dc.subjectPsychology, Multidisciplinaryen
dc.subjectPsychologyen
dc.subjectPSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARYen
dc.subjectChinese cultureen
dc.subjectcultural differenceen
dc.subjectfatalismen
dc.subjectmoral decision makingen
dc.subjectmoral judgmenten
dc.subjectresponsibilityen
dc.subjectTaoismen
dc.subjecttrolley problemen
dc.subjectMORAL JUDGMENTen
dc.subjectDECISION-MAKINGen
dc.subjectSELFen
dc.subjectPREDICTIONen
dc.subjectINTUITIONSen
dc.subjectDISSONANCEen
dc.subjectCOGNITIONen
dc.subjectINTENTIONen
dc.subjectEMOTIONen
dc.subjectMODELen
dc.titleCultural differences in responses to real-life and hypothetical trolley problemsen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.description.statusPeer-revieweden
dc.description.versionPublisher Versionen
dc.type.subtypeArticle;Journal-
pubs.organisational-group/Organisationen
pubs.organisational-group/Organisation/COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND PSYCHOLOGYen
pubs.organisational-group/Organisation/COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND PSYCHOLOGY/School of Psychologyen
pubs.organisational-group/Organisation/COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND PSYCHOLOGY/Themesen
pubs.organisational-group/Organisation/COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND PSYCHOLOGY/Themes/No themeen
Appears in Collections:Published Articles, School of Psychology

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
cultdiff.pdfPlease select a version188.48 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in LRA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.