Social class and moral judgment: a process dissociation perspective.

Do social classes differ in moral judgment? Previous research showed that upper-class actors have a greater inclination toward utilitarian judgments than lower-class actors and that this relationship is mediated by empathic concern. In this paper, we take a closer look at class-based differences in moral judgment and use the psychometric technique of process dissociation to measure utilitarian and deontological decision inclinations as independent and orthogonal concepts. We find that upper-class actors do indeed have a greater inclination toward decisions consistent with utilitarian principles, albeit only to a quite small extent. Class-related differences are more pronounced with respect to deontological judgments, in so far as upper-class actors are less inclined to judgments consistent with deontological principles than lower-class actors. In addition, it is shown that class-based differences in utilitarian judgments are mediated by cognitive styles and not so much by empathic concern or moral identity. None of these potential mediators explains class-based differences in the inclination toward deontological judgments.

Individuals of high socioeconomic status are altruistic in sharing money but egoistic in sharing time.

The questions of whether and how socioeconomic status (SES) predicts prosocial behavior have sparked an interest from different disciplines, yet experimental evidence is inconclusive. We embedded two types of dictator games in a web survey with 7772 participants from Germany, Poland, Sweden, and the US. Each participant was asked to split a sum of money and a fixed amount of time between themself and a recipient. While higher-SES individuals are more generous than lower-SES individuals in the money game, they are more egoistic in the time game. In addition, the SES of the recipient matters more in the money game than in the time game. These results point towards the relevancy of a situationally contingent social norm of redistribution in studying the relationship between SES and prosocial behavior.

Triage in Times of COVID-19: A Moral Dilemma.

We present evidence from choice experiments on hypothetical triage decisions in a pandemic. Respondents have to decide who out of two patients gets ventilation. Patients are described in terms of attributes such as short-term survival chance, long-term life expectancy, and their current ventilation status. Attributes are derived from the ethical discourse among experts regarding triage guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic and differ in the extent to which they are salient from a utilitarian or deontological perspective. Empirically, we find that although nonexperts agree with experts in prioritizing utilitarian attributes in triage decisions, nonexperts also consider the adherence to the norm of wearing face masks as particularly relevant. Furthermore, our study supports Greene and colleagues' dual-process model of moral judgment; we find that utilitarian attributes are more decisive for respondents with a greater inclination toward utilitarianism and for respondents with a greater tendency toward reflection.

Intuition, reflection, and prosociality: Evidence from a field experiment.

Are humans instinctively good or is it only our capacity for reflection that enables us to restrain our selfish traits and behave prosocially? Against the background of dual-process theory, the question of whether people tend to behave prosocially on intuitive grounds has been debated controversially for several years. Central to this debate is the so-called social heuristic hypothesis (SHH), which states that subjects orient their behavior more closely to their deeply ingrained norms and attitudes when the behavior comes about in an intuitive rather than reflective manner. In this paper, we apply the SHH to a novel setting and investigate whether its implications hold true in a non-reactive field experiment, in which subjects are unaware that they are part of a study. We test whether subjects report a misdirected email or try to use the opportunity to reap a monetary benefit. Since all subjects participated six months prior to the field experiment in a lab experiment, we have solid measures of the subjects' general tendency to behave intuitively and their prosocial attitudes. In addition, participants were asked in a follow-up survey to self-report their intuitiveness at the time of the decision. While we observe a significant and positive effect on prosocial behavior for self-reported intuitiveness (but not for general intuitiveness) in the bivariate analyses, this effect becomes insignificant when controlling for interaction effects with attitudes. In addition, for both forms of intuitiveness, we find a significant and positive interaction effect with subjects' prosocial attitudes on prosocial behavior. Hence, this study confirms previous findings from laboratory as well as online studies and provides external validity by demonstrating that the SHH applies in a real-life situation.

Does economic inequality moderate the effect of class on prosocial behavior? A large-scale test of a recent hypothesis by Côté et al.

Empirical research has provided mixed evidence regarding the question of whether higher social class promotes prosocial behavior. Recently, Côté et al. [1] hypothesized that these conflicting evidences might result from a hitherto neglected interaction between the individual's level of income and the degree of inequality in one's society. They argue that societies with a higher level of inequality foster a sense of entitlement in high-income individuals, which in turn leads them to be less generous. We put this reasoning to a large-scale test using observational data from the European Social Survey (ESS) and push the scope of our investigation towards a broader conception of social class, using next to income two additional measures of class. First, we examine whether high-class individuals in societies with high levels of inequality do in fact feel more entitled than their counterparts in more equal societies. While we find that an individual's class and the disposition towards entitlement are strongly correlated, our results show a negative interaction with inequality, i.e. the effect of class on the personal sense of entitlement is weaker in societies with high levels of inequality. Second, we test whether the effect of class on prosocial behavior is moderated by economic inequality with respect to two real-life acts of prosocial behavior, namely engaging in volunteer work and donating money to a humanitarian organization. Our results indicate a substantial positive effect of class on prosocial behavior throughout, as well as a moderate, yet positive, interaction effect of class and inequality.

Experimental Evidence on Iterated Reasoning in Games.

We present experimental evidence on two forms of iterated reasoning in games, i.e. backward induction and interactive knowledge. Besides reliable estimates of the cognitive skills of the subjects, our design allows us to disentangle two possible explanations for the observed limits in performed iterated reasoning: Restrictions in subjects' cognitive abilities and their beliefs concerning the rationality of co-players. In comparison to previous literature, our estimates regarding subjects' skills in iterated reasoning are quite pessimistic. Also, we find that beliefs concerning the rationality of co-players are completely irrelevant in explaining the observed limited amount of iterated reasoning in the dirty faces game. In addition, it is demonstrated that skills in backward induction are a solid predictor for skills in iterated knowledge, which points to some generalized ability of the subjects in iterated reasoning.