Study 2 (Empathy and utilitarian choices in sacrificial dilemmas)

Article title: Turning off the empathy switch:
Lower empathic concern for the victim leads to utilitarian choices of action

Participants
N = 170

Measures
1) Utilitarian choices of action in 6 dilemmas (Footbridge, Crying Baby, Vaccine, Raftboat, Modified Safari, and Sophie’s Choice)
- Responses were recorded on a 4-point scale from 0 (definitely no) to 3 (definitely yes).
2) Empathic concern for each target
- Participants were asked to report the extent to which they felt empathic for the victim and the saved in sacrificial dilemmas
- Responses were recorded on a 5-point scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (to a great extent)
3) Justifications for utilitarian choices of action
- Five types of justification items were used to probe into how people reason about their choices in sacrificial dilemmas
- The five justifications items were: 1) deontological ethics; 2) descriptive norm; 3) emotional reactivity; 4) selfish concern; and 5) confidence
4) LSRP-1 (primary psychopathy)
- Responses were recorded on a 4-point scale from 0 (disagree strongly) to 3 (agree strongly)
5) Empathic concern (dispositional)
- A subscale of Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), Empathic Concern (EC), was used
- Responses were recorded on a 5-point scale from 1 (not at all characteristic of me) to 5 (extremely characteristic of me).

文章标题：关闭同理心开关：对受害者同理心的降低导致功利主义行动的选择

参与者
N = 170

测量指标
1) 在6个道德困境（桥梁、哭泣的婴儿、疫苗、改装的帆船、修改过的狩猎旅行和索菲的选择）中的功利主义行动选择
- 对应的回答记录在0（绝对不）至3（绝对是）的4点量表上。
2) 对每个目标对象的同理心关注
- 参与者被要求报告他们对受害者以及牺牲困境中获救者的同理心程度
- 回答记录在1（一点也不）至5（非常）的5点量表上。
3) 功利主义行动选择的理由
- 使用五种类型的理由项目来探究人们在牺牲困境中如何推理他们的选择
- 五种理由项目包括：1) 道义伦理；2) 描述性规范；3) 情感反应；4) 自私关注；5) 信心。
4) LSRP-1（原发性心理病态）
- 回答记录在0（强烈不同意）至3（强烈同意）的4点量表上。
5) 同理心关注（性格倾向性）
- 使用人际反应指数（IRI）的子量表同理心关注（EC）
- 回答记录在1（我一点也不）至5（我极其）的5点量表上。