Moral decision-making and support for safety procedures amid the COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract

Given that individual differences influence virus-mitigating behaviors and the COVID-19 pandemic posed new moral dilemmas for individuals to resolve, across three studies (N = 704), we assessed how masculine honor beliefs (MHB), beliefs in pure good (BPG), evil (BPE), and the dark triad (DT) influence COVID-19 moral decision-making. Specifically, we analyzed moral decision-making at the microlevel (i.e., individual- and familial-level; Study 1), in decisions with (hypothetical) life-or-death consequences (Study 2), and at the macrolevel (i.e., nationwide virus-mitigation efforts; Study 3). In all studies, participants completed the four individual difference scales and rated their pandemic attitudes on Likert-type agreement scales, and resolved various moral dilemmas in Studies 2 and 3. Consistent with our hypotheses, individuals reported more virus-mitigation efforts in order to protect their families than themselves. In terms of hypothetical life-or-death and nationwide decisions, MHB, BPE, and the DT predicted more confidence and social motivations, whereas BPG predicted more distress. This research has implications for moral decision-making at varying degrees of severity during the COVID-19 pandemic.