TY - JOUR
T1 - Not all who ponder count costs
T2 - Arithmetic reflection predicts utilitarian tendencies, but logical reflection predicts both deontological and utilitarian tendencies
AU - Byrd, Nick
AU - Conway, Paul
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2019/11
Y1 - 2019/11
N2 - Conventional sacrificial moral dilemmas propose directly causing some harm to prevent greater harm. Theory suggests that accepting such actions (consistent with utilitarian philosophy) involves more reflective reasoning than rejecting such actions (consistent with deontological philosophy). However, past findings do not always replicate, confound different kinds of reflection, and employ conventional sacrificial dilemmas that treat utilitarian and deontological considerations as opposite. In two studies, we examined whether past findings would replicate when employing process dissociation to assess deontological and utilitarian inclinations independently. Findings suggested two categorically different impacts of reflection: measures of arithmetic reflection, such as the Cognitive Reflection Test, predicted only utilitarian, not deontological, response tendencies. However, measures of logical reflection, such as performance on logical syllogisms, positively predicted both utilitarian and deontological tendencies. These studies replicate some findings, clarify others, and reveal opportunity for additional nuance in dual process theorist's claims about the link between reflection and dilemma judgments.
AB - Conventional sacrificial moral dilemmas propose directly causing some harm to prevent greater harm. Theory suggests that accepting such actions (consistent with utilitarian philosophy) involves more reflective reasoning than rejecting such actions (consistent with deontological philosophy). However, past findings do not always replicate, confound different kinds of reflection, and employ conventional sacrificial dilemmas that treat utilitarian and deontological considerations as opposite. In two studies, we examined whether past findings would replicate when employing process dissociation to assess deontological and utilitarian inclinations independently. Findings suggested two categorically different impacts of reflection: measures of arithmetic reflection, such as the Cognitive Reflection Test, predicted only utilitarian, not deontological, response tendencies. However, measures of logical reflection, such as performance on logical syllogisms, positively predicted both utilitarian and deontological tendencies. These studies replicate some findings, clarify others, and reveal opportunity for additional nuance in dual process theorist's claims about the link between reflection and dilemma judgments.
KW - Belief bias
KW - Cognitive reflection test
KW - Dual-process theory
KW - Moral dilemmas
KW - Moral psychology
KW - Process dissociation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068566612&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85068566612&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.06.007
DO - 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.06.007
M3 - Article
C2 - 31301587
AN - SCOPUS:85068566612
SN - 0010-0277
VL - 192
JO - Cognition
JF - Cognition
M1 - 103995
ER -