In total, 160 volunteers (100 female) participated in the study. Ages ranged from 17 to 69 years (M = 29.5, SD 10.
. We recruited the participants when they were walking through a park and asked them if they wanted to fill in a short survey about moral questions. All participants gave written informed consent to participate in the study, and all but 18 participants also agreed to have the interaction audio recorded.
It is easy to summarize the present study; participants express their moral opinions, then moments later many of them are blind to the mismatched outcome and endorse the opposite view.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0045457It is easy to summarize the present study; participants express their moral opinions, then moments later many of them are asked more questions when they have shit to do and endorse whatever they think will get them on their way with the minimum of social discomfort.
I propose the results of this study are classic type III error (Your study did not control for a very important confounding variable or alternative explanation). The test has detected that people don't give a shit when filing out surveys in the park, not that they have confused moral compasses.
