Harm to others outweighs harm to self in moral decision making

TLDR

Concern for others is central to moral decision making, yet how people weigh others’ suffering remains poorly understood, especially since hypothetical judgments often fail to predict real behavior. The study measured how much money participants were willing to sacrifice to reduce painful electric shocks delivered to either themselves or an anonymous stranger. Most participants sacrificed more money to alleviate a stranger’s pain than their own, offering insight into moral dilemmas in medical, legal, and political contexts.

Abstract

Significance Concern for the welfare of others is a key component of moral decision making and is disturbed in antisocial and criminal behavior. However, little is known about how people evaluate the costs of others’ suffering. Past studies have examined people’s judgments in hypothetical scenarios, but there is evidence that hypothetical judgments cannot accurately predict actual behavior. Here we addressed this issue by measuring how much money people will sacrifice to reduce the number of painful electric shocks delivered to either themselves or an anonymous stranger. Surprisingly, most people sacrifice more money to reduce a stranger’s pain than their own pain. This finding may help us better understand how people resolve moral dilemmas that commonly arise in medical, legal, and political decision making.