Deconfounding the effects of acute stress on abstract moral dilemma judgment

The effect of cognitive load, ego depletion, induction and time restriction on moral judgments about sacrificial dilemmas: a meta-analysis

Greene's influential dual-process model of moral cognition (mDPM) proposes that when people engage in Type 2 processing, they tend to make consequentialist moral judgments. One important source of empirical support for this claim comes from studies that ask participants to make moral judgments while experimentally manipulating Type 2 processing. This paper presents a meta-analysis of the published psychological literature on the effect of four standard cognitive-processing manipulations (cognitive load; ego depletion; induction; time restriction) on moral judgments about sacrificial moral dilemmas [n = 44; k = 68; total N = 14, 003; M(N) = 194.5]. The overall pooled effect was in the direction predicted by the mDPM, but did not reach statistical significance. Restricting the dataset to effect sizes from (high-conflict) personal sacrificial dilemmas (a type of sacrificial dilemma that is often argued to be best suited for tests of the mDPM) also did not yield a significant pooled effect. The same was true for a meta-analysis of the subset of studies that allowed for analysis using the process dissociation approach [n = 8; k = 12; total N = 2, 577; M(N) = 214.8]. I argue that these results undermine one important line of evidence for the mDPM and discuss a series of potential objections against this conclusion.

Beyond Trolleyology: The CNI Model of Moral-Dilemma Responses

PUBLIC ABSTRACT

How do people make judgments about actions that violate moral norms yet maximize the greater good (e.g., sacrificing the well-being of a small number of people for the well-being of a larger number of people)? Research on this question has been criticized for relying on highly artificial scenarios and for conflating multiple distinct factors underlying responses in moral dilemmas. The current article reviews research that used a computational modeling approach to disentangle the roles of multiple distinct factors in responses to plausible moral dilemmas based on real-world events. By disentangling sensitivity to consequences, sensitivity to moral norms, and general preference for inaction versus action in responses to realistic dilemmas, the reviewed work provides a more nuanced understanding of how people make judgments about the right course of action in moral dilemmas.

Anticipatory Stress Increases Deontological Inclinations: The Mediating Role of Emotional Valence

Previous studies have explored the differences in moral judgments under normal situations and acute stress using the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST). The present study examined whether anticipatory stress (i.e., induced by an anticipated speech) could elicit similar effects and further explored the mediation of emotional responses between acute stress and moral judgments with a process-dissociation approach. Fifty-three undergraduate students (20 males and 33 females) were randomly assigned to the stress and control groups. In the first stage, they were instructed to prepare a public speech (the stress group) or just recall events during the previous vacation (the control group). In the second stage, they reported emotional valence and arousal for each moral dilemma in a set of 12 moral dilemmas, followed by judgments on moral acceptability of the agent's action. The manipulation check confirmed that anticipatory stress was reliably induced, as indicated in both self-reported and physiological data. The traditional dilemma analysis revealed that participants in the stress group would make fewer utilitarian judgments than those in the control group. The process dissociation (PD) analyses further revealed that the stress group exhibited higher deontological inclinations than the control group, but no significant differences in utilitarian inclinations. Emotional valence played a mediating role in the association between stress and deontological inclinations. To sum up, our study extended the investigation of the relationship between acute stress and moral judgment to anticipatory stress, clarified its distinct impact on deontological and utilitarian inclinations, and revealed the mediating effect of emotional valence.

Everyday moral decision-making after acute stress exposure: do social closeness and timing matter?

There is increasing empirical evidence that social distance and timing affect prosocial behavior after acute stress exposure. The present study focused on everyday moral decision-making after acute psychosocial stress and how it is influenced by effects of social closeness and timing. We exposed 40 young healthy men to the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST, n = 20) or its non-stressful placebo version (PTSST, n = 20). Moral decision-making was assessed early (+10 until +30 min) and late (+75 until +95 min) after (P)TSST exposure by the Everyday Moral Conflict Situations (EMCS) Scale. The EMCS Scale requests altruistic versus egoistic responses to everyday moral conflict situations with varying closeness of target persons. Results revealed significantly higher total percentages of altruistic decisions in the stress than in the control condition and for scenarios involving socially close (e.g., mother) versus socially distant (e.g., stranger) protagonists, while the main effect of timing was nonsignificant. Only secondary analyses showed increased altruistic decision-making after acute stress exposure toward socially close but not toward distant protagonists at the early but not at the late point of measurement. Moreover, psychological stress responses and personality traits were significantly associated with EMCS scores. Positive correlations between cortisol levels and altruistic decision-making were descriptively observable, but did not reach statistical significance. In sum, our findings suggest increased altruistic decision-making toward socially close compared to socially distant protagonists and provide further evidence that acute stress influences decision-making in everyday moral conflict scenarios in a prosocial manner.Lay summaryIn order to investigate the effects of acute stress on everyday moral decision-making, 40 young healthy men were exposed to moderate psychosocial stress by the use of the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) or its non-stressful placebo version and then completed a hypothetical everyday moral decision-making paradigm. Our findings provide evidence that acute stress exposure influences decision-making in everyday moral conflict situations in a prosocial manner. Furthermore, participants decided more altruistically in scenarios involving socially close (e.g., mother) versus socially distant (e.g., stranger) protagonists.

Effects of gender and personality on everyday moral decision-making after acute stress exposure

Exposure to acute psychosocial stress has been shown to affect moral decision-making, though little is known about potential gender differences or effects of personality. In two within-subjects design studies, 179 healthy men and women (N = 99 in Study 1, N = 80 in Study 2) were exposed to the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) and a non-stress control condition (resting period) on two testing days in random order. After stress/resting, moral decision-making was assessed by the Everyday Moral Conflict Situations (EMCS) Scale (Singer et al., 2019), which requests altruistic versus egoistic responses to everyday moral conflict scenarios with varying closeness of target persons. We investigated effects of acute stress, social closeness, participants' gender, and the a priori selected personality traits agreeableness, empathy, and social desirability on everyday moral decision-making. Despite high statistical power, we could neither confirm the hypothesized effects of acute stress nor social closeness on EMCS scores in both samples. However, our data revealed a prosocial impact of acute stress on everyday moral decisions rather in females than males as well as effects of agreeableness and social desirability. Salivary alpha-amylase (sAA) levels in Study 1 and cortisol levels in females in Study 2 were significantly correlated with higher EMCS scores after acute stress exposure. Additionally, lower anticipatory subjective stress responses were associated with more altruistic decisions. Moreover, we found positive relationships between hypothetical moral decision-making and real prosocial behavior (opportunity for a charitable donation). In sum, due to methodological differences compared to previous between-subjects design studies, it might not be justified to rule out effects of acute stress on everyday moral decision-making based on the current within-subjects results. Nevertheless, the present data suggest that specific personality traits like agreeableness might have a stronger impact on everyday moral decision-making than short term-exposure to acute stress.