The Influence of (Dis)belief in Free Will on Immoral Behavior

Abstract

One of the hallmarks of human existence is that we all hold beliefs that determine how we act. Amongst such beliefs, the idea that we are endowed with free will appears to be linked to prosocial behaviors, probably by enhancing the feeling of responsibility of individuals over their own actions. However, such effects appear to be more complex that one might have initially thought. Here, we aimed at exploring how induced disbeliefs in free will impact the sense of agency over the consequences of one’s own actions in a paradigm that engages morality. To do so, we asked participants to choose to inflict or to refrain from inflicting an electric choc to another participant in exchange of a small financial benefit. Our results show that participants who were primed with a text defending neural determinism – the idea that humans are a mere bunch of neurons guided by their biology – administered fewer shocks and were less vindictive toward the other participant. Importantly, this finding only held for female participants. These results show the complex interaction between gender, (dis)beliefs in free will and moral behavior.

Behavioral explanations reduce retributive punishment but not reward: The mediating role of conscious will

“…However, the present studies suggest an additional insight into the consequences of reduced perceptions of conscious will, particularly when making judgements about other people. Together with previous research (Caspar et al, 2017;Krueger et al, 2013;Shariff et al, 2014), we suggest that the desire to balance the scale of justice declines when perceptions of conscious will are reduced. This does not suggest that responsibility gets thrown out altogether.…”

“…Therefore, judgements of deserved retribution should be influenced by attitudes towards free will (e.g., if they had free will, they should be punished). Indeed, belief in free will is associated with support for retributive punishment (Caspar et al 2017;Krueger et al, 2013;Shariff et al, 2014). In contrast, consequentialist punishment is less concerned with whether punishment is deserved, but rather the societal benefits that will come from imprisonment, such as security, psychiatric help, and deterrence of future crimes (e.g., if the transgressor is unable harm others in the future and their punishment would not deter others, they should not be punished; Bentham, 1986).…”

Belief in free will affects causal attributions when judging others’ behavior

“…Participants and Design. A total of 164 participants (50.6% female) participated in our study [a few participants did not fill in the FWI (43); therefore, all analysis that involved the FWI could be run on n = 137 only]. The ages ranged from 18 to 68 (M = 36.42, SD = 11.82).…”

“…Procedure. To manipulate belief in free will, we applied a manipulation that has been successfully and often used in previous research (for a metaanalysis, see Supporting Information) investigating the consequences of weakening people's belief in free will (e.g., 18,21,24,25,27,43). Specifically, participants read a passage of the book The Astonishing Hypothesis: The Scientific Search for the Soul written by Francis Crick (44).…”

“…After participants completed all scenarios, they filled in the FWI (ref. 43; Cronbach's α = 0.75). Finally, we assessed Rotter's (45) locus of control scale (Supporting Information).…”