The mismeasure of morals: antisocial personality traits predict utilitarian responses to moral dilemmas

Researchers have recently argued that utilitarianism is the appropriate framework by which to evaluate moral judgment, and that individuals who endorse non-utilitarian solutions to moral dilemmas (involving active vs. passive harm) are committing an error. We report a study in which participants responded to a battery of personality assessments and a set of dilemmas that pit utilitarian and non-utilitarian options against each other. Participants who indicated greater endorsement of utilitarian solutions had higher scores on measures of Psychopathy, machiavellianism, and life meaninglessness. These results question the widely-used methods by which lay moral judgments are evaluated, as these approaches lead to the counterintuitive conclusion that those individuals who are least prone to moral errors also possess a set of psychological characteristics that many would consider prototypically immoral.     

What types of advice do decision-makers prefer?

In the decision-making literature, “advice” has typically been defined very restrictively, as a recommendation concerning which alternative the decision-maker should choose. The present paper examines decision-makers’ reactions to this and three additional types of advice (a recommendation concerning which alternative not to choose, information about alternatives, and a recommendation concerning how to make the decision), along with another common form of interpersonal assistance (Social Support), from the perspective of maximizing decision accuracy and maintaining decision autonomy. The role of situational and individual differences is also examined. Results from two multilevel policy-capturing studies indicate that, although they consider recommendations regarding which alternative to choose to be important in some contexts, decision-makers often prefer to receive a type of advice that is greatly understudied by researchers—namely, the provision of information about alternatives. The implications of these findings for the study of advice-taking are discussed, as are future research directions.     

Individual differences in fast-and-frugal decision making: Neuroticism and the recognition heuristic

The fast-and-frugal recognition heuristic (RH) claims that people base inferences on recognition only, thus ignoring further knowledge they possess. This claim has been repeatedly challenged, while recent evidence suggests that there are substantial individual differences in adhering to the RH. However, no personality or ability factors driving (non-)use of the RH have, as yet, been identified. In the present study, neuroticism was hypothesized to be a determinant of using the RH: participants high in neuroticism were expected to avoid making use of their knowledge beyond recognition, thus avoiding a diagnostic test of their abilities. The results corroborate this hypothesis: neuroticism predicted participants’ adherence to the RH while the other Big 5 factors and intelligence yielded no additional explanatory power. Moreover, the effect of neuroticism was not mediated by the accessibility of knowledge thus lending preliminary support for the notion that this effect may, in fact, be genuinely motivational in nature.     

When can we say 'if'?

In this study, we focus on the conditions which permit people to assert a conditional statement of the form 'if p then q' with conversational relevance. In a broadly decision-theoretic approach, also drawing on hypothetical thinking theory [Evans, J. St. B. T. (2007). Hypothetical thinking: Dual processes in reasoning and judgement. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.], we predicted that conditional tips and promises would appear more useful and persuasive and be more likely to encourage an action p when (a) the conditional link from p to q was stronger, (b) the cost of the action p was lower and (c) the benefit of the consequence q was higher. Similarly, we predicted that conditional warnings and threats would be seen as more useful and persuasive and more likely to discourage an action p when (a) the conditional link from p to q was stronger, (b) the benefit of the action p was lower and (c) the cost of the consequence q was higher. All predictions were strongly confirmed, suggesting that such conditionals may best be asserted when they are of high relevance to the goals of the listener.     

The path or the goal? Decision vs. information focus in biased information seeking after preliminary decisions

Research on the phenomenon of selective exposure to information demonstrates that after preliminary or final decisions, people show a preference for supporting rather than conflicting information (confirmation bias). In this article, we examine conditions that increase or decrease distortions in the search for information. We report on four experiments indicating that the confirmation bias is influenced by whether people focus on their decision or on the presented pieces of information during the information search. Focusing on the decision, for example, because a reward for a correct decision is promised or simply because participants repeatedly think of it, increases the confirmation bias. On the other hand, if participants focus on the available pieces of information because they have to invest money in order to search for information or because they have to evaluate the individual pieces of information, the confirmation bias decreases. Implications for theoretical understanding and interventions for decision-making situations are discussed.     

Seeing oneself in one’s choices: Construal level and self-pertinence of electoral and consumer decisions

Building on previous research examining the implications for self-regulation and decision making of construing action at varying levels of abstraction, the authors proposed that construing action in terms of its abstract purposes facilitates orienting one’s decisions toward the standards, characteristics, and goals that define one’s desired self-concept. Consistent with this proposal, desiring for oneself a political candidate’s personal qualities predicted evaluating favorably (in Study 1) and voting for (in Study 2) that candidate to a greater extent among participants focused on the distal future (and presumably construing action at a relatively high-level of abstraction) than the proximal future (and presumably construing action at a relatively low-level of abstraction). Moreover, individuals chronically construing action in high-level terms responded more favorably to advertisements appealing to their desired self-concept (in Study 3) than to product quality. These findings’ implications for decision making are discussed.     

The Role of Spirituality in Advance Directive Decision Making Among Independent Community Dwelling Older Adults

The purpose of this grounded theory study, based on Strauss and Corbin’s (1998) grounded theory methodology, was to investigate the meaning, definition, and needs regarding the role of spirituality in end of life care among independent community dwelling older adults in relation to advance directive decision making (ADDM). Findings revealed that through the use of story telling, independent community dwelling older adults were able to define spirituality and describe the important role spirituality plays in everyday life and in ADDM. A theoretical model was constructed consisting of a mirrored basic social process, Spirituality as Connecting.     

Dimension integration: Testing models without trade-offs

This paper tests a behavioral property called dimension integration. The test evaluates models, such as lexicographic semi-orders and the priority heuristic, which assume that a person uses only one dimension at a time. It provides a way to compare such models against those that assume a person combines information from different dimensions. The test allows one to test the hypothesis that different people use different lexicographic semi-orders with different threshold parameters. In addition, by use of a “true and error” model, it is possible to “correct” for unreliability of choice in order to estimate the proportions of participants who show different response patterns that can be classified as integrative or not integrative. An experiment with 260 participants was conducted in which people made choices between two-branch gambles. The aggregate results violate the priority heuristic and six lexicographic semi-orders. The data also refute the theory that people use a mixture of these lexicographic semi-orders. In addition, few individuals appear to show response patterns consistent with non-integrative models. Instead, they show that most individuals show patterns consistent with the hypothesis that they combine information between dimensions.     

Inherent biases in decision support systems: the influence of optimistic and pessimistic DSS on choice,affect, and attitudes

This study investigates the influence of a decision aid on decision makers' model‐based choices, emotions during the use of the model, and attitudes towards the model. A time allocation decision model was biased to purposefully provide optimistic or pessimistic criterion levels, on which subjects based their allocations. The results of our experiment indicate that the degree of “optimism” and “pessimism” inherent in the decision model had a significant impact on the decision maker's choices of criterion values, with optimism leading to higher criterion level choices and pessimism to lower levels. Furthermore, compared to pessimistic models, optimistic models significantly improved the decision makers' emotional states and, to some degree, their attitudes towards the decision aid. The implications of these conscious and sub‐conscious influences on decision makers' choices, emotions, and attitudes are discussed and the need for model‐builders and users to be aware of them is highlighted. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Development of a Tissue Engineered Heart Valve for Pediatrics: A Case Study in Bioengineering Ethics

The following hypothetical case study was developed for bioengineering students and is concerned with choosing between two devices used for development of a pediatric tissue engineered heart valve (TEHV). This case is intended to elicit assessment of the devices, possible future outcomes, and ramifications of the decision making. It is framed in light of two predominant ethical theories: utilitarianism and rights of persons. After the case was presented to bioengineering graduate students, they voted on which device should be released. The results revealed that these bioengineering students preferred the more reliable (and substantially more expensive) design, though this choice precludes the majority of the world from having access to this technology. This case is intended to examine and explore where the balance lies between design, cost, and adequate distribution of biomedical devices.