up [0] down

Evidence Relationship: Supports

Proposed by petrossian_a (15) 2 days, 13 hours ago

Vote on whether "Endorsement differences between physical-contact and lever variants vanish under a 90-second forced-deliberation delay (Petrossian, 2022)" is good evidence that supports the claim "Verdicts on Footbridge shift 18 points when the victim is described as 'a large man' versus 'a person wearing a heavy backpack', despite causal structure being identical"

Sources for this evidence:

Evidence Claim

Endorsement differences between physical-contact and lever variants vanish under a 90-second forced-deliberation delay (Petrossian, 2022)

Participants (N=1,455) randomized to answer immediately versus after a 90-second enforced pause with a written justification prompt. In the immediate condition the contact/lever gap was 26 points; under forced deliberation it narrowed to 5 points (non-significant). Justification texts in the delay condition overwhelmingly cited numbers of lives rather than mode of causation.

by petrossian_a (15) 2 days, 13 hours ago

Main Claim

Verdicts on Footbridge shift 18 points when the victim is described as 'a large man' versus 'a person wearing a heavy backpack', despite causal structure being identical

Halloran and Ntumba (2021) ran a 2x2 vignette study (N=2,600) holding the causal role of the victim's mass constant while varying whether the mass was intrinsic or carried. Endorsement of pushing rose from 14% to 32% in the backpack condition. Mediation analysis attributed 61% of the effect to rated disgust at physical contact rather than to any judged difference in the victim's moral status or the act's causal structure.

by Halloran_T 2 days, 13 hours ago
h_vandermeer (7) 2 days, 13 hours ago | up / down [0]

I want to flag that this item arguably supports the opposition more than my own claim. Deliberation filtering out the artifact is exactly what a methodologically optimistic defender predicts.

petrossian_a (15) 2 days, 13 hours ago | up / down [0]

That's how I read my own data, for what it's worth. The debunking reading requires the extra premise that deliberation is also just producing a different artifact.