People making deontological judgments in the Trapdoor dilemma are perceived to be more prosocial in economic games than they actually are
Open Access
- 11 October 2018
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLOS ONE
- Vol. 13 (10), e0205066
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0205066
Abstract
Why do people make deontological decisions, although they often lead to overall unfavorable outcomes? One account is receiving considerable attention: deontological judgments may signal commitment to prosociality and thus may increase people’s chances of being selected as social partners–which carries obvious long-term benefits. Here we test this framework by experimentally exploring whether people making deontological judgments are expected to be more prosocial than those making consequentialist judgments and whether they are actually so. In line with previous studies, we identified deontological choices using the Trapdoor dilemma. Using economic games, we take two measures of general prosociality towards strangers: trustworthiness and altruism. Our results procure converging evidence for a perception gap according to which Trapdoor-deontologists are believed to be more trustworthy and more altruistic towards strangers than Trapdoor-consequentialists, but actually they are not so. These results show that deontological judgments are not universal, reliable signals of prosociality.This publication has 72 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Model of Human Cooperation in Social DilemmasPLOS ONE, 2013
- A solution to the mysteries of morality.Psychological Bulletin, 2013
- Dictator games: a meta studyExperimental Economics, 2011
- The online laboratory: conducting experiments in a real labor marketExperimental Economics, 2011
- Proscriptive versus prescriptive morality: Two faces of moral regulation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2009
- Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgmentCognition, 2008
- Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgementsNature, 2007
- moral heuristicsBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 2005
- Trust, Reciprocity, and Social HistoryGames and Economic Behavior, 1995
- Nonconsequentialist decisionsBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1994