ABSTRACT

In this paper, we consider two competing explanations of the empirical finding that people’s causal attributions are responsive to normative details, such as whether an agent’s action violated an injunctive norm – the counterfactual view and the responsibility view. We then present experimental evidence that uses the trolley dilemma in a new way to investigate causal attribution. In the switch version of the trolley problem, people judge that the agent ought to flip the switch, but they also judge that she is more responsible for the resulting outcome when she does so than when she refrains. As predicted by the responsibility view, but not the counterfactual view, people are more likely to say that the agent caused the outcome when she flips the switch.

摘要

在本文中，我们考虑了人们的因果归因对规范细节做出反应的实证发现的两种相互竞争的解释，例如代理人的行为是否违反了禁令规范——反事实观点和责任观点。然后，我们提供了实验证据，以一种新的方式使用电车困境来研究因果归因。在电车问题的开关版本中，人们判断代理人应该拨动开关，但他们也判断，当她这样做时，比她不这样做时，她对产生的结果负有更大的责任。正如责任观点所预测的那样，而不是反事实观点所预测的那样，人们更有可能说代理人在她拨动开关时造成了结果。