اصول اثر دوگانه و تماس شخصی: سازوکارهای شهودی تصمیم‌گیری اخلاقی مقاله

هدف پژوهش حاضر، بررسی سازوکارهای ذهنی تصمیم‌گیری در دوراهی‌های اخلاقی بوده است. اهداف موردنظر در پژوهش عبارت بودند از: 1. تأثیر دو اصل اخلاقی اثر دوگانه و تماس شخصی بر تصمیم‌گیری شرکت‌کننده‌ها؛ 2. رابطۀ هیجان فوری با تصمیم‌گیری اخلاقی و ۳. بررسی میزان آگاهی افراد از اصول زیربنایی تصمیم‌گیری‌های اخلاقی‌ خود در شرایط محدودیت زمانی. این پژوهش ازجمله طرح‌های ترکیبی بوده است. ابزار پژوهش شامل سه سناریو بود که از پژوهش‌های مشابه اقتباس شد. جامعۀ آماری شامل دانشجویان فعال در شبکه‌های مجازی مربوط به دانشگاه‌های سراسری شهر تهران بود. حجم نمونه 129 نفر بود و ازطریق روش دردسترس نمونه‌گیری انجام شد. برای تجزیه‌وتحلیل آماری نیز از آزمون تحلیل واریانس، آزمون تعقیبی توکی و ضریب همبستگی پیرسون استفاده شد. براساس نتایج پژوهش، تأثیر هر دو اصل مذکور بر تصمیم‌گیری اخلاقی آزمودنی‌ها به‌طور معنی‌داری (001/0 p ) تأیید شد. همچنین، مشخص شد که آزمودنی‌ها از اصول مذکور آگاهی ندارند. همچنین، میان میزان پذیرفتنی‌بودن به‌لحاظ اخلاقی و هیجان خوشایندی دربارۀ واقعۀ اخلاقی رخ داده، در سناریوها در شرایط محدودیت زمانی همبستگی مثبت (01/0 p ) وجود داشته است. از یافته‌های پژوهش می‌توان نتیجه گرفت که تصمیم‌گیری اخلاقی تابع سیستمی دوگانه است که عبارت‌اند از: 1. سیستمی شهودی، خودکار، فوری، جهان‌شمول و مبتنی بر هیجان که تابع سازوکارهای ذهنی بنیادین و حاصل فرایند انتخاب طبیعی است و فرد نسبت به آنها آگاهی چندانی ندارد و 2. سیستم منطقی که حاصل تقکر آگاهانه است و مسبب ارائۀ توجیهاتی برای تصمیم‌گیری‌های اخلاقی فوری می‌شود.

The aim of the current research was to investigate the mental mechanisms of decision-making in moral dilemmas. The objectives of this study were: (1) to see the effect of the ethical principles of double effect and personal contact on the participants’ decision-making, (2) the relationship of immediate emotions with ethical decision-making, and (3) to examine the level of people's awareness of the underlying principles of their ethical decisions under time constraints. Mixed-methods design was used in this study. Research instruments included three scenarios adapted from similar studies. The statistical population included students active in virtual networks of national universities in Tehran. A number of 129 subjects were selected using convenience sampling. For statistical analysis, variance test analysis, Tukey's post hoc test, and Pearson's correlation coefficient were utilized. The research results showed the significant effect of both mentioned principles on the participants’ ethical decision making (pIntroductionIn recent years, Social Intuitionist Model of Moral Judgment has been proposed based on the evolutionary perspective. According to this approach, people first make decisions intuitively and then provide reasons for their decision and in many cases, they experience Moral Dumbfounding (Haidt, 2001; Haidt, 2007). In this regard, studies using Trolley Dilemma were conducted in different cultures in order to examine the three ethical principles of " action or action-inaction or action-omission", "personal contact", and "double effect", which are thought to be the mechanisms governing the intuitive and immediate moral decisions of people (e.g., Abarbanell & Hauser, 2010; Arutyunova & Hauser 2013; Cushman et al, 2006; Hauser et al, 2007; Petrinovich et al, 1993; Aghababaie and Hatami, 2011; Bazram, 2022). The results of these studies showed that besides the fact that "personal contact principle" and " double effect principle" are universal and culture-independent mechanisms, people are not aware of the aforementioned principles that govern their decisions.The following part talks about the focus of the current study. Previous studies were mainly conducted in western cultures. Also, the effect of each of the principles of "action”, "personal contact", and "double effect" has been investigated alone, and the cumulative effect of the above principles on ethical decisions has been neglected. According to the idea that immediate moral decisions are made based on inner intuition and immediate emotions while facing moral dilemmas, the relationship between inner feelings or immediate emotions with the moral judgment of subjects was not examined. In addition, in that study, only the effect of the "double effect principle" and the unlimited time opportunity for the participants to think have been investigated.Based on what has been stated, the study has pursued three goals: (1) examining the relationship between the "acceptability level" of an ethical act and the "pleasantness level" as representatives of the participant's inner sense in time-limited conditions, (2) examining the effect of the principles "personal contact" and "double effect" on the level of "pleasantness" and "acceptability" in participants in time-limited conditions, and (3) examining the participants' awareness of the underlying principles of their answers. Research methodThe current study was a mixed-methods design type, the responses of the participants were analyzed in quantitative and qualitative ways. The research method used three scenarios adapted from Cushman et al. (2006) and Hauser et al. (2007) and were presented to participants along with the picture related to each scenario. The participants had to describe the acceptability and the pleasantness of the event in the scenario in a 10-point scale, and provide the reasons for their answers without time limit. The population included the students of Tehran universities active on Instagram page of the mentioned universities. The sample included 129 subjects, selected by the convenience sampling method. Variance test analysis, Tukey's post hoc test, and Pearson's correlation coefficient were utilized for statistical analysis. FindingsBased on the results, the degree of acceptability as well as the pleasantness in all three scenarios under the influences of "double effect principle" and "personal contact principle" were significantly (p DiscussionIn the current study, in line with the results of Arutyunova & Hauser (2013), Cushman et al. (2006), Hauser et al. (2007), and Aghababaie and Hatami (2011), it has been determined that "foreseen harm" is more acceptable than "intended harm", and "no personal contact" is more acceptable than "personal contact". In this way, the influence of the principles of "double effect" and "personal contact" on the moral judgment of the participants were confirmed. It was also found that the principles of "personal contact" and "double effect" have a cumulative effect on moral judgment. In explaining this finding, assuming that the psychological mechanisms affected by the two principles of "personal contact" and "double effect" are the result of the history of human evolution, it can be hypothesized that the mentioned mechanisms have a social function and have been naturally selected for this purpose.Also, in examining the relationship between levels of "acceptability" and "pleasantness" for the participants regarding the actions taken in the scenarios, the results showed a positive and significant correlation between the two mentioned variables in all three scenarios. Thus, as Cushman et al. (2006), Greene et al. (2004), Haidt (2001), and Hauser et al. (2007) claim, individuals’ immediate moral decisions appear to be affected by some kind of inner intuition or perceived emotion in the moment of facing a moral dilemma, based on which people make their decision. In this process, individuals’ conscious reasoning does not have a prominent role. In explaining this phenomenon and from an evolutionary perspective, it is possible to hypothesize that individuals’ decisions in critical moments are somehow affected by a computing system the person is not aware of. In that way, decisions are made based only on their momentary feeling. This mechanism which is naturally selected, must probably have been useful for human survival.Also, the participants were not significantly aware of the principle of "personal contact" and "double effect" while they responded to the scenarios based on the two aforementioned principles. At the same time, 46.09% of the participants had experienced "moral Dumbfounding " in justifying their answers. In explaining this phenomenon according to Greene et al. (2004), it seems that there are two moral systems, one is responsible for immediate, automatic and unconscious decisions, and the other is responsible for conscious and reasoned decisions.The application of the present study as a fundamental one was to increase the knowledge of the mechanisms of ethical decision making. Among the limitations of the research, the method of data collection can be mentioned, which was done using convenience sampling and through virtual networks. It is suggested that physical and random selection be used in future studies.