Dirty work, clean hands: The moral psychology of indirect agency

Neeru Paharia,Karim S Kassam,Joshua D Greene,Max H Bazerman

doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.03.002

Neeru Paharia, Karim S Kassam + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.03.002

Copy DOI

Abstract

When powerful people cause harm, they often do so indirectly through other people. Are harmful actions carried out through others evaluated less negatively than harmful actions carried out directly? Four experiments examine the moral psychology of indirect agency. Experiments 1A, 1B, and 1C reveal effects of indirect agency under conditions favoring intuitive judgment, but not reflective judgment, using a joint/separate evaluation paradigm. Experiment 2A demonstrates that effects of indirect agency cannot be fully explained by perceived lack of foreknowledge or control on the part of the primary agent. Experiment 2B indicates that reflective moral judgment is sensitive to indirect agency, but only to the extent that indirectness signals reduced foreknowledge and/or control. Experiment 3 indicates that effects of indirect agency result from a failure to automatically consider the potentially dubious motives of agents who cause harm indirectly. Experiment 4 demonstrates an effect of indirect agency on purchase intentions.

Highlights

As in Experiment 1, actions carried out indirectly through secondary agents were deemed less unethical than actions carried out directly in separate evaluations favoring intuitive judgment
In Experiment 2B, we examined the influence of the same two factors on reflective moral judgment by using joint evaluation
Under conditions favoring reflective judgment, participants did not distinguish between harm caused directly and harm caused indirectly when foreknowledge and control were explicitly attributed to the primary agent

Summary

Method Participants

[The pharmaceutical firm raised the price of the drug from $3/pill to $9/pill, increasing the value of the drug to company X by $10 million.] In the SE-indirect condition, the text in brackets was replaced with the following: “The major pharmaceutical X sold the rights to a smaller pharmaceutical, Y, for $12 million. All participants were asked “On a scale of 1 (not at all unethical) - 10 (very unethical), how unethical do you think company X's behavior was in this decision?” In the JE condition, the text in brackets was replaced with the following: Consider two cases in which the firm had either: Case A) Raised the price of the drug from $3/pill to $9/pill, raising the value of the drug to company X by $10 million, or Case B) Sold the rights to produce the drug to a smaller company Y for $12 million. Students in professional schools of business or medicine might take a course in “ethics,” but are unlikely to take a course in “morality.”

Results

Participants

Discussion