Hypothetical Judgment and Real-Life Decision-Making in Sacrificial Dilemmas: A Replication of “of Mice, Men and Trolleys”

Do people respond similarly to hypothetical moral dilemmas as they do to real-life dilemma situations? Bostyn et al. (2018) explored this question by confronting one group of participants with a real dilemma involving mice, and another with a hypothetical description of that dilemma situation. In the current manuscript, we report the results of three new data collections involving the same research paradigm aimed at replicating and extending this earlier work. One sample included a within-subjects condition where participants encountered both versions of the dilemma which demonstrated that a significant proportion of participants (19%) change their decisions when moving from the hypothetical to real-life context. Switching behavior showed an asymmetry: participants were more likely to switch from rejecting to accepting sacrificial harm than vice versa. However, in contrast to earlier findings, we find that responses to hypothetical dilemma batteries significantly predict real-life dilemma decisions. This work reinforces the utility of using hypothetical scenarios to study moral psychology while also demonstrating that responses can differ systematically between hypothetical and real-life contexts.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Collabra Psychology
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.143715
Primary Topic
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Hypothetical Judgment and Real-Life Decision-Making in Sacrificial Dilemmas: A Replication of “of Mice, Men and Trolleys”

Jasper Van Assche, Arne Roets, Stefaan Van Damme, Laura De Souter et al.
Collabra Psychology
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
article

Hypothetical Judgment and Real-Life Decision-Making in Sacrificial Dilemmas: A Replication of “of Mice, Men and Trolleys”

Jasper Van Assche, Arne Roets, Stefaan Van Damme, Laura De Souter, Tessa Haesevoets, Alain Van Hiel, Barbara Valcke, Kim Dierckx, Dries H. Bostyn
article en

Abstract

Do people respond similarly to hypothetical moral dilemmas as they do to real-life dilemma situations? Bostyn et al. (2018) explored this question by confronting one group of participants with a real dilemma involving mice, and another with a hypothetical description of that dilemma situation. In the current manuscript, we report the results of three new data collections involving the same research paradigm aimed at replicating and extending this earlier work. One sample included a within-subjects condition where participants encountered both versions of the dilemma which demonstrated that a significant proportion of participants (19%) change their decisions when moving from the hypothetical to real-life context. Switching behavior showed an asymmetry: participants were more likely to switch from rejecting to accepting sacrificial harm than vice versa. However, in contrast to earlier findings, we find that responses to hypothetical dilemma batteries significantly predict real-life dilemma decisions. This work reinforces the utility of using hypothetical scenarios to study moral psychology while also demonstrating that responses can differ systematically between hypothetical and real-life contexts.

Collabra PsychologyVol. 11(1)
HOGENT University of Applied Sciences and Arts (BE), Université Libre de Bruxelles (BE), Ghent University Hospital (BE), Ghent University (BE)
Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Openalex Percentile: Top 74%
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.