Moral dilemmas and trust in leaders during a global health crisis

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Documents

  • Fulltext

    Accepted author manuscript, 6.07 MB, PDF document

  • Jim A.C. Everett
  • Clara Colombatto
  • Edmond Awad
  • Paulo Boggio
  • Björn Bos
  • William J. Brady
  • Megha Chawla
  • Vladimir Chituc
  • Dongil Chung
  • Moritz A. Drupp
  • Srishti Goel
  • Brit Grosskopf
  • Alissa Ji
  • Caleb Kealoha
  • Judy S. Kim
  • Yangfei Lin
  • Yina Ma
  • Michel André Maréchal
  • Federico Mancinelli
  • Christoph Mathys
  • Graeme Pearce
  • Annayah M.B. Prosser
  • Niv Reggev
  • Nicholas Sabin
  • Julien Senn
  • Yeon Soon Shin
  • Walter Sinnott-Armstrong
  • Hallgeir Sjåstad
  • Madelijn Strick
  • Sunhae Sul
  • Lars Tummers
  • Monique Turner
  • Hongbo Yu
  • Yoonseo Zoh
  • Molly J. Crockett

Abstract: Trust in leaders is central to citizen compliance with public policies. One potential determinant of trust is how leaders resolve conflicts between utilitarian and non-utilitarian ethical principles in moral dilemmas. Past research suggests that utilitarian responses to dilemmas can both erode and enhance trust in leaders: sacrificing some people to save many others (‘instrumental harm’) reduces trust, while maximizing the welfare of everyone equally (‘impartial beneficence’) may increase trust. In a multi-site experiment spanning 22 countries on six continents, participants (N = 23,929) completed self-report (N = 17,591) and behavioural (N = 12,638) measures of trust in leaders who endorsed utilitarian or non-utilitarian principles in dilemmas concerning the COVID-19 pandemic. Across both the self-report and behavioural measures, endorsement of instrumental harm decreased trust, while endorsement of impartial beneficence increased trust. These results show how support for different ethical principles can impact trust in leaders, and inform effective public communication during times of global crisis. Protocol Registration Statement: The Stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on 13 November 2020. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.13247315.v1.

Original languageEnglish
JournalNature Human Behaviour
Volume5
Issue numberaugust
Pages (from-to)1074-1088
Number of pages15
ISSN2397-3374
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2021

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.

Number of downloads are based on statistics from Google Scholar and www.ku.dk


No data available

ID: 275532263