Professor PUZZLE Moral Conflict

Product Information

Initially, a pool of 60 hypothetical everyday moral conflict situations with two forced-choice response alternatives (altruistic vs. For future studies, a much larger data base would be necessary to perform a further in-depth analysis of the potentially underlying factoral structure. As a supplementary analysis, we finally examined if the answers to items with socially close protagonists differed depending on the actual existence of the target persons (e. Players can compete or cooperate in Moral Conflict strategy board game as you develop your world power during the Second World War period.

Notably, in our data, there were neither effects of social closeness nor gender on the percentage of altruistic decisions. Clarifying gender differences in moral dilemma judgments: the complementary roles of harm aversion and action aversion. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

For testing the unidimensionality of the EMCS Scale and the appropriateness of the fragmentation into the two item sets A and B, we used the Martin-Loef LR-test [ 59]. Therefore, one might be more willing to accept the costs of an egoistic response option not only for socially distant others, but also to some degree for socially close persons. Similar to Study 1, participants subsequently had to rate the social closeness of the protagonists on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = very socially distant to 7 = very socially close as well as the similarity to reality of the presented situations on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = very far from reality to 7 = very close to reality. Egoistic responses of items with socially distant protagonists were rated as significantly more egoistic than egoistic responses of scenarios with socially close protagonists, indicating that fulfilling a personal desire towards strangers was perceived as slightly more egoistic than towards family and friends. Moreover, we only selected items with a clear representation of altruistic and egoistic response classes, unambiguous social closeness classifications, and high similarity to reality ratings.

Additionally, using Wilks L mvc tests [ 54], we successfully developed two parallelized 20-items sets A and B. In a second step, the 20 item pairs were split into two different item sets (each ten scenarios with socially close and socially distant protagonists). Therefore, social closeness could be one further potential modulating factor of everyday moral decision-making (apart from the emotionality of a situation, which has already been examined in previous studies; see [ 22, 23]).

This inconsistent result could potentially be explained by the fact that our new EMCS Scale measures altruistic and egoistic response tendencies, which are behavioral measures that rather reflect outcomes of morality, but not moral attitudes itself [ 43]. Means, standard deviations, and between-group comparisons regarding the percentage of altruistic decisions, altruistic and egoistic response ratings, social closeness ratings, and similarity to reality ratings separately for the 20 items with socially close and socially distant protagonists.