The closer you are, the more it hurts: the impact of proximity on moral decision-making.

Abstract

Moral dilemmas arise when individuals must navigate conflicts between competing moral principles. Sacrificial dilemmas are widely used to examine factors influencing decision-making (DM). This study explored how proximity affects moral DM using computer-based interactive videos depicting variations of the Footbridge Dilemma, aiming to clarify how contextual factors shape moral evaluations. In Study 1, scenarios required varying levels of physical proximity between the decision-maker and the victim, mirroring real-world behavioural patterns. Participants' choices (utilitarian vs. deontological), response times (RTs), and emotional responses (factual and counterfactual) were analysed. Study 2 controlled for action type while manipulating only the visual representation of distance, allowing for an isolated examination of perceived proximity's impact. The findings suggest that significant differences in physical perceived distance influence moral choices, whereas minor variations do not meaningfully affect decisions. Counterfactual emotions emerged as key drivers of moral judgment, shaping participants' responses to dilemmas. Future research should extend these findings to non-hypothetical contexts. The implications span clinical practice, legal systems, and artificial intelligence, offering insights for both theoretical advancements and practical applications.