IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0354169.html

Third- and concerned-party positions in moral dilemmas: Effect of empathy on ethical judgment

Author

Listed:
  • Hiroshi Nonami
  • Shoji Ohtomo
  • Toshiaki Aoki
  • Motoaki Sugiura
  • Go Sakamoto
  • Kentaro Oba
  • Yutaka Tashiro

Abstract

The present study proposes a categorization of moral dilemmas into third-party dilemmas in which a judge’s choice affects only the life or death of others, and concerned-party dilemmas in which not only others’ but also the judge’s life or death is altered. While the former requires the judge to make only moral judgments to save others, another rational decision-making process that considers the judge’s life and death may also impact the latter. We examined ethical judgments based on these two types of dilemmas with a focus on empathic concern. Participants in Experiment 1 were more ethically permissive to save the many including him/herself at the expense of one person in the concerned-party dilemma than in the third-party dilemma, but empathic concern in both types of dilemmas consistently suppressed such utilitarian choices derived from “instrumental harm” (IH), which permits sacrificing a few necessary when it saves many. In Experiment 2, we also confirmed the suppressive effect of empathic concern for utilitarian choices derived from IH in the Pareto concerned-party dilemma in which the death of one person remains fixed regardless of the judge’s choice. We discuss the importance of categorizing these two types of dilemmas in moral dilemmas and demonstrates the public goods dilemma as a Pareto concerned-party dilemma in everyday life.

Suggested Citation

  • Hiroshi Nonami & Shoji Ohtomo & Toshiaki Aoki & Motoaki Sugiura & Go Sakamoto & Kentaro Oba & Yutaka Tashiro, 2026. "Third- and concerned-party positions in moral dilemmas: Effect of empathy on ethical judgment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(7), pages 1-20, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0354169
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0354169
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0354169
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0354169&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0354169?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adam B. Moore & N. Y. Louis Lee & Brian A. M. Clark & Andrew R. A. Conway, 2011. "In defense of the personal/impersonal distinction in moral psychology research: Cross-cultural validation of the dual process model of moral judgment," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(3), pages 186-195, April.
    2. Smith, V Kerry & Desvousges, William H, 1986. "The Value of Avoiding a Lulu: Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(2), pages 293-299, May.
    3. Moore, Adam B. & Lee, N. Y. Louis & Clark, Brian A. M. & Conway, Andrew R. A., 2011. "In defense of the personal/impersonal distinction in moral psychology research: Cross-cultural validation of the dual process model of moral judgment," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 186-195, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sergio Barbosa & William Jiménez-Leal, 2017. "It’s not right but it’s permitted: Wording effects in moral judgement," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(3), pages 308-313, May.
    2. Büsra Aktas & Onurcan Yilmaz & Hasan G. Bahçekapili, 2017. "Moral pluralism on the trolley tracks: Different normative principles are used for different reasons in justifying moral judgments," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(3), pages 297-307, May.
    3. Gary H. McClelland & William D. Schulze & Brian Hurd, 1990. "The Effect of Risk Beliefs on Property Values: A Case Study of a Hazardous Waste Site," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 485-497, December.
    4. Josephine Auer, 2026. "When Does Static Willingness to Pay Mislead? A Framework for Dynamic Hedonic Valuation," Papers 2603.02456, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2026.
    5. Joseph A. Herriges & Silvia Secchik & JBruce A. Babcock, 2005. "Living with Hogs in Iowa: The Impact of Livestock Facilities on Rural Residential Property Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(4).
    6. Niels Vermeer & Wouter Vermeulen, 2011. "External Benefits of Brownfield Redevelopment: An Applied Urban General Equilibrium Analysis," CPB Discussion Paper 178, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    7. Carattini, Stefano & Figge, Béla & Gordan, Alexander & Löschel, Andreas, 2024. "Municipal building codes and the adoption of solar photovoltaics," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    8. Phoebe Koundouri, 2004. "Econometrics Informing Natural Resources Management:Selected Empirical Analyses," DEOS Working Papers 0401, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    9. Wu, JunJie, 2006. "Environmental amenities, urban sprawl, and community characteristics," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 527-547, September.
    10. McCluskey, Jill & Rausser, Gordon C., 1999. "Stigmatized asset value: is it temporary or permanent?," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt59b1t566, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    11. Mary Parkinson & Ruth M. J. Byrne, 2017. "Moral judgments of risky choices: A moral echoing effect," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(3), pages 236-252, May.
    12. Jill J. McCluskey & Gordon C. Rausser, 2001. "Estimation of Perceived Risk and Its Effect on Property Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 42-55.
    13. Yves Schneider & Peter Zweifel, 2013. "Spatial Effects in Willingness to Pay for Avoiding Nuclear Risks," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 149(3), pages 357-379, September.
    14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2011. "Handbook on the Benefits, Costs, and Impacts of Land Cleanup and Reuse," Environmental Economics Guidance Documents 348897, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    15. Ida Ferrara & Stephen McComb & Paul Missios, 2007. "Local Willingness-to-Pay Estimates for the Remediation of the Sydney Tar Ponds in Nova Scotia," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 33(4), pages 441-458, December.
    16. Caplan, Arthur & Grijalva, Therese & Jackson-Smith, Douglas, 2007. "Using choice question formats to determine compensable values: The case of a landfill-siting process," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 834-846, February.
    17. James T. Hamilton, 1995. "Testing for environmental racism: Prejudice, profits, political power?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 107-132.
    18. Chuanwang Sun & Xiaochun Meng & Shuijun Peng, 2017. "Effects of Waste-to-Energy Plants on China’s Urbanization: Evidence from a Hedonic Price Analysis in Shenzhen," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-18, March.
    19. John Braden & Xia Feng & DooHwan Won, 2011. "Waste Sites and Property Values: A Meta-Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(2), pages 175-201, October.
    20. Janet Geipel & Constantinos Hadjichristidis & Luca Surian, 2015. "The Foreign Language Effect on Moral Judgment: The Role of Emotions and Norms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0354169. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.