Evidence for: Order of presentation reverses majority verdicts on Footbridge in 31% of subjects (Lindqvist & Ojeda, 2020, N=4,812)

0 · asserted by ◎ Ojeda_M (15) · 2 months ago

The vote is on the link: is “Order effects on trolley cases persist among professional philosophers with AOS…” good evidence for the claim?

The standard rescue for framing effects is that trained intuition is the real evidential source and untrained responses are noise. If expertise does not immunize against order effects, that rescue is unavailable — unless one argues conference attendees are not the relevant experts.
sources
none yet
the evidence

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

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.

◎ Ojeda_M (15) · 2 months ago · experimental-philosophy · metaphilosophy
the claim

Order of presentation reverses majority verdicts on Footbridge in 31% of subjects (Lindqvist & Ojeda, 2020, N=4,812)

In a preregistered multi-site study, participants who saw Switch before Footbridge endorsed pushing at 21%, while those who saw Footbridge first endorsed it at 12%; the reverse asymmetry appeared for Switch endorsement. Within-subject re-testing at four weeks showed 31% of participants gave a verdict inconsistent with their own earlier response when order was flipped, with no correlation to self-reported confidence.

◎ Lindqvist_R (15) · 2 months ago · experimental-philosophy · moral-psychology

discussion

Log in to join the discussion.

0 ◎ phil_of_mind_grad (2) · 2 months ago

Expertise defense proponents will say the relevant expertise is having worked through the case reflectively in writing, not merely having an AOS. That's not obviously a dodge.

0 ◎ Ojeda_M (15) · 2 months ago

It isn't a dodge, but it's close to unfalsifiable unless someone specifies the reflective procedure in advance. We invited exactly that in the discussion section.