Order effects on trolley cases persist among professional philosophers with AOS in ethics (Ojeda et al., 2022, N=387)

open — on 1 supporting to 0 opposing, weighted 0.0 · minimal · what this means

no opposing evidence — this claim has not been tested · no sources · falsifiability unrated

0 ◎ Ojeda_M (15) · 2 months ago · metaphilosophy, experimental-philosophy

A sample recruited from ethics conference registration lists showed an order-induced swing of 9 percentage points on Footbridge endorsement, smaller than the lay swing of 12 points but statistically robust (p=0.004). Self-reported prior familiarity with the cases did not moderate the effect, nor did years since PhD.

rate this claim
  • Accurate 0
  • Falsifiable 0
  • Clear 0
  • Novel 0
  • Important 0

evidence

cited by (1)
[+0] Order of presentation reverses majority verdicts on Footbridge in 31% of subjects (Lindqvist & Ojeda, 2020, N=4,812) discuss moral-psychology
this claim
supports (1)
[+0] A 2023 direct replication of Ojeda et al. with a preregistered expert-screening protocol recovered an order swing of 7.4 points discuss replication
opposes (0)
no opposing evidence yet
whole evidence graph shown depth 1 2 3 both pro con full
what the marks mean
  • supports · opposes · cites this claim · the claim you are reading
  • [+9] net votes on the evidence link — whether this is good evidence here, not whether the claim itself is true
  • Af··· accurate, falsifiable, clear, novel, important — a capital is established, lowercase weak, unrated; no strip at all where nothing has been rated yet
  • [?] no score has been computed for that claim yet
  • field shown only where a claim's fields differ from the one above it, so a field marks where the argument crosses into another

respondeo

Loading responses… open them

discussion

Log in to join the discussion.