Skip to content
PaperFren

Moral psychology

Does feeling cold make people's moral choices more utilitarian?

Sudo R, Nakashima SF, Ukezono M, et al. · Frontiers in psychology · 2021

Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC

Across four experiments, cooler temperatures did not reliably change how acceptable people found sacrificing one person to save many.

Study at a glance

Design
Human experiment — Four between-subjects experiments manipulating room temperature (Exps 1, 3, 4) or cooling pads on the body (Exp 2), with manipulation checks of felt warmth, comfort and skin temperature; mixed-effects models plus a Bayesian t test pooling all four
N
Separate samples: Exp 1 N = 82, Exp 2 N = 82, Exp 3 N = 48, Exp 4 N = 68 Japanese students
Population
Healthy Japanese undergraduate and graduate students
Outcome
Rated moral acceptability of sacrificial (utilitarian) actions in controlled moral dilemmas; in Exp 3 also acceptability of real-world moral images

Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.

Key findings

Temperature manipulations worked: people felt colder and less comfortable, and skin temperature changed. Only Experiment 1 found the expected effect of cool rooms increasing acceptance of sacrificial actions; Experiments 2 and 3 found no effect, and Experiment 4 found long cold exposure made judgments less utilitarian, the opposite direction. Pooling the strongest condition from all four experiments, a Bayesian test gave a Bayes factor of 10.74 favouring no effect.

Methodology

Building on an earlier finding that cold makes people more willing to sacrifice one to save many, the researchers ran four experiments with Japanese students rating moral dilemmas. Experiment 1 set the room to 21°C, 24°C or 27°C; Experiment 2 kept the room constant but cooled one or three pads on the forehead, neck and hand; Experiment 3 compared a cool and a control room using dilemmas plus a task rating real-world moral images; Experiment 4 varied how long people spent in the cold (none, 5 minutes or 60 minutes). They checked that people actually felt colder and measured skin temperature.

Limitations

Temperatures stayed within an ethically comfortable range (about 21-27°C), so the study cannot rule out effects of truly cold, stressful conditions. Participants knew the study concerned temperature and answered repeated manipulation checks, which may have made them guarded. Experiment 3 fell short of its planned sample and group sizes were unbalanced in several experiments. The dilemma task captures acceptance of instrumental harm rather than utilitarian concern for the greater good in general.

How this study connects

Role on claims

Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.

Not yet placed on a claim. This paper has study layers, but no concept page yet cites it as support, challenge, or qualifier.

Related papers in this topic

Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.