Fair allocation of resources in the moral dilemma of triage.

IF 2.2 Q2 SOCIOLOGY
Frontiers in Sociology Pub Date : 2025-05-13 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fsoc.2025.1570940
Peer Keßler, Ivar Krumpal
{"title":"Fair allocation of resources in the moral dilemma of triage.","authors":"Peer Keßler, Ivar Krumpal","doi":"10.3389/fsoc.2025.1570940","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Against the background of the COVID-19 pandemic that has shaken societies around the world, the debate about fairness of medical allocation decisions is gaining momentum. Studying a sample of a broad international public (<i>N</i> = 1,998), we investigate citizens' ethical preferences in the moral dilemma of triage decisions. First, we address the key problem of which of several contradictory ethical criteria and normative principles should be used to determine the fairness of outcomes in triage situations. Preferences about fair outcomes are inferred from observed allocation decisions in a conjoint experiment. Second, preferences in regard to fair procedures are measured via fairness ratings of a series of triage procedures. Third, we analyze the relationship between the observed allocation outcomes and the fairness ratings of procedures. Finally, we review the current expert discourse and reflect it with the citizens ethical preferences observed in our study.</p>","PeriodicalId":36297,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sociology","volume":"10 ","pages":"1570940"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12106452/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2025.1570940","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Against the background of the COVID-19 pandemic that has shaken societies around the world, the debate about fairness of medical allocation decisions is gaining momentum. Studying a sample of a broad international public (N = 1,998), we investigate citizens' ethical preferences in the moral dilemma of triage decisions. First, we address the key problem of which of several contradictory ethical criteria and normative principles should be used to determine the fairness of outcomes in triage situations. Preferences about fair outcomes are inferred from observed allocation decisions in a conjoint experiment. Second, preferences in regard to fair procedures are measured via fairness ratings of a series of triage procedures. Third, we analyze the relationship between the observed allocation outcomes and the fairness ratings of procedures. Finally, we review the current expert discourse and reflect it with the citizens ethical preferences observed in our study.

资源公平分配中的道德困境分诊。
在新冠肺炎疫情席卷全球的背景下,围绕医疗分配公平性的争论愈演愈烈。研究了一个广泛的国际公众样本(N = 1998),我们调查了公民在分诊决策的道德困境中的道德偏好。首先,我们解决了几个相互矛盾的伦理标准和规范原则中应该使用哪一个来确定分诊情况下结果的公平性的关键问题。对公平结果的偏好是从联合实验中观察到的分配决策中推断出来的。其次,对公平程序的偏好是通过对一系列分类程序的公平评级来衡量的。第三,我们分析了观察到的分配结果与程序公平评级之间的关系。最后,我们回顾了目前的专家话语,并将其与我们研究中观察到的公民伦理偏好相结合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Sociology
Frontiers in Sociology Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
198
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信