Adolescents Are More Utilitarian Than Adults in Group Moral Decision-Making

Abstract

This study explores how peers influence the moral decisions of Chinese adolescents (12- to 16-year-olds, M_age = 14.32, n = 84) and young adults (18- to 26-year-olds, M_age = 20.92, n = 99) in moral dilemmas. Participants were asked to make moral decisions individually and then collectively within groups of three to reach a consensus in Trolly dilemma and Footbridge dilemma. They were also required to evaluate the degree to which they felt their decisions were moral. Results showed that adolescents tended to choose “action” (pull the lever in Trolly dilemma, or push the man in Footbridge dilemma) more than adults, and evaluate their “no action” choice as more immoral than young adults across both individual and group settings. Adolescents showed consistent decision-making patterns regardless of whether decisions were made individually or collectively, while adults were more likely to choose “no action” in group decision-making. Our results suggest that adolescents are more utilitarian than young adults when making decisions in moral dilemmas, compared to young adults. Young adults are less likely to make utilitarian choices when they are in groups than when they make decisions individually.

Keywords

adolescent / group decision-making / moral decision-making / peer influence / utilitarian

References

[1] Ahmed, S., L. Foulkes, J. T. Leung, et al. 2020. “Susceptibility to Prosocial and Antisocial Influence in Adolescence.” Journal of Adolescence 84: 56-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2020.07.012.

[2] Awad, E., S. Dsouza, A. Shariff, I. Rahwan, and J. F. Bonnefon. 2020. “Universals and Variations in Moral Decisions Made in 42 Countries by 70,000 Participants.” Proceedings of the National Academy of the United States of America 117, no. 5: 2332-2337. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1911517117.

[3] Bago, B., M. Kovacs, J. Protzko, et al. 2022. “Situational Factors Shape Moral Judgements in the Trolley Dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western Countries in a Culturally Diverse Sample.” Nature Human Behaviour 6, no. 6: 880-895. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01319-5.

[4] Bandura, A., G. V. Caprara, C. Barbaranelli, C. Pastorelli, and C. Regalia. 2001. “Sociocognitive Self-Regulatory Mechanisms Governing Transgressive Behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80: 125-135.

[5] Brainerd, C. J., and V. F. Reyna. 2015. “Fuzzy-Trace Theory and Lifespan Cognitive Development.” Developmental Review 38: 89-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2015.07.006.

[6] Bucciarelli, M.2015. “Moral Dilemmas in Females: Children Are More Utilitarian Than Adults.” Frontiers in Psychology 6: 1345. https://doi.org/10.3339/fpsyg.2015.01345.

[7] Carlo, G., and L. Padilla-Walker. 2020. “Adolescents’ Prosocial Behaviors Through a Multidimensional and Multicultural Lens.” Child Development Perspectives 14, no. 4: 265-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12391.

[8] Conway, P., and B. Gawronski. 2013. “Deontological and Utilitarian Inclinations in Moral Decision Making: A Process Dissociation Approach.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104, no. 2: 216-235. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031021.

[9] Cheon, B. K., D. M. Im, T. Harada, et al. 2011. “Cultural Influences on Neural Basis of Intergroup Empathy.” NeuroImage 57, no. 2: 642-650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.04.031.

[10] Chierchia, G., B. Piera Pi-Sunyer, and S.-J. Blakemore. 2020. “Prosocial Influence and Opportunistic Conformity in Adolescents and Young Adults.” Psychological Science 31, no. 12: 1585-1601. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620957625.

[11] Curşeu, P. L., O. C. Fodor, A. Pavelea, and N. Meslec. 2020. ““Me” Versus “We” in Moral Dilemmas: Group Composition and Social Influence Effects on Group Utilitarianism.” Business Ethics: A European Review 29, no. 4: 810-823. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12292.

[12] Cushman, F.2013. “Action, Outcome, and Value.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 17, no. 3: 273-292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868313495594.

[13] Daniele, M., and M. Bucciarelli. 2016. “Age-Related Differences in Moral Judgments to Moral Dilemmas.” [Paper presentation]. Torino, Italy: AISC 2016.

[14] De Cremer, D., and C. Moore. 2020. “Toward a Better Understanding of Behavioral Ethics in the Workplace.” Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 7: 369-393. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015151.

[15] Gawronski, B., J. Armstrong, P. Conway, R. Friesdorf, and M. Hutter. 2017. “Consequences, Norms, and Generalized Inaction in Moral Dilemmas: The CNI Model of Moral Decision-Making.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 113, no. 3: 343-376. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000086.

[16] Gawronski, B., P. Conway, M. Hütter, et al. 2020. “On the Validity of the CNI Model of Moral Decision-Making: Reply to Baron and Goodwin (2020).” Judgment and Decision Making 15, no. 6: 1054-1072. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1930297500008251.

[17] Gibbs, J. C.2020. “Stages of Adolescent Moral Development.” In Encyclopedia of Child and Adolescent Development, edited by S. Hupp and J. D. Jewell, 1-7. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

[18] Gleichgerrcht, E., and L. Young. 2013. “Low Levels of Empathic Concern Predict Utilitarian Moral Judgment.” PLoS One 8, no. 4: e60418. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060418.

[19] Haller, S. P. W., D. Bang, B. Bahrami, and J. Y. F. Lau. 2018. “Group Decision-Making Is Optimal in Adolescence.” Scientific Reports 8, no. 1: 15565. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-33557-x.

[20] Hao, J., and Y. Liu. 2016. “A Mind-Reader Does Not Always Have Deontological Moral Judgments and Prosocial Behavior: A Developmental Perspective.” Frontiers in Psychology 7: 1261. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01261.

[21] Hauser, M., F. Cushman, L. Young, R. Kang-Xing Jin, and J. Mikhail. 2007. “A Dissociation Between Moral Judgments and Justifications.” Mind & Language 22, no. 1: 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2006.00297.x.

[22] Kant, I.1948. Moral Law: Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203981948.

[23] Keller, M.1984. “Rechtfertigungen. Zur Entwicklung Praktischer Erkla¨rungen.” In Soziale Interaktion und soziales Verstehen, edited by W. Edelstein and J. Habermas, 253-299. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Suhrkamp.

[24] Keshmirian, A., O. Deroy, and B. Bahrami. 2022. “Many Heads Are More Utilitarian Than One.” Cognition 220: 104965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104965.

[25] Knoll, L. J., L. Magis-Weinberg, M. Speekenbrink, and S. J. Blakemore. 2015. “Social Influence on Risk Perception During Adolescence.” Psychological Science 26, no. 5: 583-592. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615569578.

[26] Kohlberg, L.1984. Essays on Moral Development: The Psychology of Moral Development. New York: Harper & Row.

[27] Kwak, Y., J. W. Payne, A. L. Cohen, and S. A. Huettel. 2015. “The Rational Adolescent: Strategic Information Processing During Decision Making Revealed by Eye Tracking.” Cognitive Development 36: 20-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coggdev.2015.08.001.

[28] Lehnert, K., Y.-H. Park, and N. Singh. 2015. “Research Note and Review of the Empirical Ethical Decision-Making Literature: Boundary Conditions and Extensions.” Journal of Business Ethics 129, no. 1: 195-219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2147-2.

[29] Luo, S., Y. Ma, Y. Liu, et al. 2015. “Interaction Between Oxytocin Receptor Polymorphism and Interdependent Culture Values on Human Empathy.” Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 10, no. 9: 1273-1281. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsv019.

[30] McNamara, R. A., A. K. Willard, A. Norenzayan, and J. Henrich. 2019. “Weighing Outcome vs. Intent Across Societies: How Cultural Models of Mind Shape Moral Reasoning.” Cognition 182: 95-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.09.008.

[31] Mill, J. S.1863. In R. Crisp, “Utilitarianism. Parker.”

[32] Nichols, S., and R. Mallon. 2006. “Moral Dilemmas and Moral Rules.” Cognition 100, no. 3: 530-542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.07.005.

[33] Reyna, V. F., and W. Casillas. 2009. “Development and Dual Processes in Moral Reasoning: A Fuzzy-Trace Theory Approach.” Psychology of Learning and Motivation 50: 207-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)00407-6.

[34] Reyna, V. F., S. M. Estrada, J. A. DeMarinis, R. M. Myers, J. M. Stanisz, and B. A. Mills. 2011. “Neurobiological and Memory Models of Risky Decision Making in Adolescents Versus Young Adults.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 37, no. 5: 1125-1142. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023943.

[35] Reyna, V. F., and C. Panagiotopoulos. 2020. “Morals, Money, and Risk-Taking From Childhood to Adulthood: The Neurodevelopmental Framework of Fuzzy Trace Theory.” In The Social Brain: A Developmental Perspective. Boston, MA: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11970.001.0001.

[36] Rhim, J., G. B. Lee, and J. H. Lee. 2020. “Human Moral Reasoning Types in Autonomous Vehicle Moral Dilemma: A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Korea and Canada.” Computers in Human Behavior 102: 39-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.010.

[37] Scollon, C. N., E. Diener, S. Oishi, and R. Biswas-Diener. 2004. “Emotions Across Cultures and Methods.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 35: 304-326. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022104264124.

[38] Smith, A. R., J. Chein, and L. Steinberg. 2014. “Peers Increase Adolescent Risk Taking Even When the Probabilities of Negative Outcomes are Known.” Developmental Psychology 50, no. 5: 1564-1568. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035696.

[39] Takagi, Y. 2014. “Adolescents' and Young Adults' Moral Thinking in Typical Everyday-Life Moral Dilemmas.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The City University of New York.

[40] Takezawa, M., M. Gummerum, and M. Keller. 2006. “A Stage for the Rational Tail of the Emotional Dog: Roles of Moral Reasoning in Group Decision Making.” Journal of Economic Psychology 27, no. 1: 117-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2005.06.012.

[41] Tracy, J. L., and D. Matsumoto. 2008. “The Spontaneous Expression of Pride and Shame: Evidence for Biologically Innate Nonverbal Displays.” Proceedings of the National Academy of the United States of America 105, no. 33: 11655-11660. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0802686105.

[42] Zeelenberg, M., R. M. A. Nelissen, S. M. Breugelmans, and R. Pieters. 2008. “On Emotion Specificity in Decision Making: Why Feeling Is for Doing.” Judgment and Decision Making 3, no. 1: 18-27. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500000139.

[43] Zhu, L., G. Huangfu, M. Keller, Y. Mou, and D. Chen. 2008. “The Development of Chinese Children's Decision Making in Ultimatum and Dictator Games.” Acta Psychologica Sinica 40, no. 4: 402-408.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2024 The Author(s). PsyCh Journal published by Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.