New research indicates that an individual's perceived physical closeness to someone at risk directly impacts their ethical decisions, particularly in situations demanding a sacrifice for a broader benefit. Published in 'Cognition & Emotion,' this study delves into how concepts like the classic trolley problem and footbridge dilemma, where individuals must choose between saving multiple lives at the cost of one, are influenced not just by the nature of the action but by the psychological distance to the person being harmed.
To explore this, scientists conducted two experiments utilizing computer-generated, interactive scenarios. The initial study involved 261 participants who faced dilemmas requiring varying levels of physical interaction with a potential casualty, such as direct pushing, using a firearm, or activating a lever for a trapdoor. Participants' choices were recorded alongside their emotional reactions, particularly focusing on guilt, shame, and regret. A subsequent study with 46 participants maintained a consistent action (pulling a lever) but varied only the visual distance to the victim. Both studies consistently demonstrated that greater perceived proximity to the individual at risk led to a decreased willingness to endorse utilitarian outcomes, favoring deontological choices instead. This pattern was mirrored by heightened negative and moral emotions when the victim felt closer.
The collective findings underscore that the degree of physical nearness plays a crucial role in shaping moral judgments, extending beyond merely the type of action involved. When individuals feel more personally connected to the potential harm, their emotional responses intensify, guiding them towards decisions that minimize distress, even if it means foregoing a utilitarian outcome that could save more lives. This research sheds light on the complex interplay between emotional intensity, perceived proximity, and the difficult choices people make in moral dilemmas.
This exploration into moral psychology reveals the profound impact of our emotional landscape and perceptions of closeness on ethical reasoning. It highlights a fundamental human tendency to prioritize immediate, personal connection over abstract, greater good calculations in moments of crisis. Understanding these underlying psychological mechanisms can offer valuable insights into human behavior and decision-making in various contexts, encouraging empathy and a deeper consideration of the personal dimension in moral discourse.