title: Moral dilemmas in females: children are more utilitarian than adults.
abstract: Influential theories on moral judgments propose that they rely either on emotions or on innate moral principles. In contrast, the mental model theory postulates that moral judgments rely on reasoning, either intuition or deliberation. The theory allows for the possibility that intuitions lead to utilitarian judgments. This paper reports two experiments involving fifth-grade children, adolescents, and adults; the results revealed that children reason intuitively to resolve moral dilemmas in which action and inaction lead to different outcomes. In particular, the results showed female children to be more utilitarian than female adults in resolving classical moral dilemmas: they preferred an action that achieved a good outcome for a greater number of people. Within the mental model theory's framework there is no reason to expect that females and males differ in their ability to reason, but at the moment the results for females cannot be generalized to males who were not properly represented in the adults groups of the two experiments. The result revealing that (female) children are more utilitarian than (female) adults, which is hard to explain via many current theories, was predicted by the mental model theory.
authors.affiliation: Dipartimento di Psicologia, Centro di Scienza Cognitiva, Università di Torino Torino, Italy.
authors.forename: Monica
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Bucciarelli
keywords: deliberative reasoning; intuitions; mental models; moral dilemmas; utilitarianism