The Trolley Problem Revisited. An Exploratory Study

Rehman, Sharaf; Dzionek‐Kozłowska, Joanna

doi:10.18778/1899-2226.21.3.02

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to previously reported findings on Hispanic American students (cf. Rehman & Dzionek-Kozłowska, 2018), present data do not show any significant differences between the choices made by the students who declared to be single and those in relationships. The results for the Single and Non-Single respondents are reported in Table 4.…”

Section: Relational Statuscontrasting

confidence: 60%

Career Choices and Moral Choices. Changing Tracks in the Trolley Problem

Dzionek‐Kozłowska

Rehman

2019

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous authors indicate that the influence of academic education extends beyond the growth of specialized knowledge gained by the graduates. Scholars are trying to identify and examine the potential impact of higher learning on students’ attitudes and choices. One of the dimensions considered by the researchers is the effect of university training on students’ moral choices. Our paper attempts to identify differences between the students’ declared moral choices and their majors (fields of studies). Working with a sample of university students of Economics and Sociology (N = 181), and using three variants of the Trolley Problem, the subjects’ responses are used to identify the similarities and differences between their choices. The participants were asked to respond to three hypothetical situations regarding a runaway trolley. Their decision in the first scenario could save a person’s life or let her be run over by the trolley. In the second scenario, their decision could either let one person die and save five lives or save one life and let five people be killed. These two scenarios required pulling a lever to switch the trolley from one track to another. The third scenario requires pushing an obese person in front of the runaway trolley to stop it from killing five persons. As expected, we found a significant difference between the two groups (the economists and the sociologists) in the case of our third scenario, however, we found no evidence supporting the indoctrination hypothesis. We conclude that the existing differences between the choices made by the future economists and sociologists may support the preselection hypothesis.

show abstract

Section: Relational Statuscontrasting

confidence: 60%

Career Choices and Moral Choices. Changing Tracks in the Trolley Problem

Dzionek‐Kozłowska

Rehman

2019

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is no significant difference between the U.S. and Chinese samples based on gender or relational status. A previous study of Hispanic American students (Rehman & Dzionek-Kozłowska 2018) reported a difference of choices in the Footbridge scenario for single and in-relationship respondents. Single people were less likely to push the man over.…”

Section: Data and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 92%

The Chinese and American Students and the Trolley Problem: A Cross-cultural Study

Rehman,

Dzionek-Kozłowsk

2020

J. inc. comm

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People are routinely faced with making decisions. Some decisions are made quickly and easily while others may take reflection and research. Scholars in numerous disciplines such as behavioral economics, marketing, philosophy, psychology, and sociology have attempted to identify the variables that impact people’s ethical/moral choices in the decision-making process. Still, the question of whether people use their heads (rationale) or their hearts (emotions) to make decisions remains unanswered. The present exploratory study hopes to contribute to the discussion on the influence of culture on people’s choices. Working with samples from two cultures (China and USA) and using three variants of the Trolley Problem (Foot 1967), the participants’ responses are used to identify the similarities and differences between their choices. The data suggest that moral decisions are linked to culture. The Chinese participants who are raised in a collectivistic culture seem to have a greater concern for others; the American respondents as products of an individualistic culture are less inclined to interfere in the lives of other people. The data also reveal that gender plays a role in altruistic behavior. Women are more likely to engage in helpful behavior than man. Lastly, the paper discusses the inconsistencies in choices by the respondents.

show abstract

“…In response to this challenge, many scholars delve into the realm of people’s moral preference in pursuit of the most widely accepted moral algorithm. Among these approaches, utilitarianism, advocating for the preservation of more lives at the expense of fewer, has garnered the highest support in previous surveys of trolley dilemma ( Hauser et al, 2007 ; Rehman and Dzionek Kozłowska, 2018 ; de Melo et al, 2021 ). In dilemma scenario of AVs, scholars also observed that most participants showed a moral inclination toward utilitarianism, even when it entailed self-sacrifice ( Bonnefon et al, 2016 ; Gawronski et al, 2017 ; Bergmann et al, 2018 ; Faulhaber et al, 2019 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring moral algorithm preferences in autonomous vehicle dilemmas: an empirical study

Sui

2023

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThis study delves into the ethical dimensions surrounding autonomous vehicles (AVs), with a specific focus on decision-making algorithms. Termed the “Trolley problem,” an ethical quandary arises, necessitating the formulation of moral algorithms grounded in ethical principles. To address this issue, an online survey was conducted with 460 participants in China, comprising 237 females and 223 males, spanning ages 18 to 70.MethodsAdapted from Joshua Greene’s trolley dilemma survey, our study employed Yes/No options to probe participants’ choices and Likert scales to gauge moral acceptance. The primary objective was to assess participants’ inclinations toward four distinct algorithmic strategies—Utilitarianism, Rawlsianism, Egoism, and a Hybrid approach—in scenarios involving AVsResultsOur findings revealed a significant disparity between participants’ preferences in scenarios related to AV design and those focused on purchase decisions. Notably, over half of the respondents expressed reluctance to purchase AVs equipped with an “egoism” algorithm, which prioritizes the car owner’s safety. Intriguingly, the rejection rate for “egoism” was similar to that of “utilitarianism,” which may necessitate self-sacrifice.DiscussionThe hybrid approach, integrating “Utilitarianism” and “Egoism,” garnered the highest endorsement. This highlights the importance of balancing self-sacrifice and harm minimization in AV moral algorithms. The study’s insights are crucial for ethically and practically advancing AV technology in the continually evolving realm of autonomous vehicles.

show abstract

The Trolley Problem Revisited. An Exploratory Study

Cited by 7 publications

References 13 publications

Career Choices and Moral Choices. Changing Tracks in the Trolley Problem

Career Choices and Moral Choices. Changing Tracks in the Trolley Problem

The Chinese and American Students and the Trolley Problem: A Cross-cultural Study

Exploring moral algorithm preferences in autonomous vehicle dilemmas: an empirical study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About