TY - JOUR
T1 - Do ethics classes influence student behavior? Case study
T2 - Teaching the ethics of eating meat
AU - Schwitzgebel, Eric
AU - Cokelet, Bradford
AU - Singer, Peter
N1 - Funding Information:
The project was financed by a grant from Princeton's University Center for Human Values and an Academic Senate Grant from University of California at Riverside .
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2020/10
Y1 - 2020/10
N2 - Do university ethics classes influence students' real-world moral choices? We aimed to conduct the first controlled study of the effects of ordinary philosophical ethics classes on real-world moral choices, using non-self-report, non-laboratory behavior as the dependent measure. We assigned 1332 students in four large philosophy classes to either an experimental group on the ethics of eating meat or a control group on the ethics of charitable giving. Students in each group read a philosophy article on their assigned topic and optionally viewed a related video, then met with teaching assistants for 50-minute group discussion sections. They expressed their opinions about meat ethics and charitable giving in a follow-up questionnaire (1032 respondents after exclusions). We obtained 13,642 food purchase receipts from campus restaurants for 495 of the students, before and after the intervention. Purchase of meat products declined in the experimental group (52% of purchases of at least $4.99 contained meat before the intervention, compared to 45% after) but remained the same in the control group (52% both before and after). Ethical opinion also differed, with 43% of students in the experimental group agreeing that eating the meat of factory farmed animals is unethical compared to 29% in the control group. We also attempted to measure food choice using vouchers, but voucher redemption rates were low and no effect was statistically detectable. It remains unclear what aspect of instruction influenced behavior.
AB - Do university ethics classes influence students' real-world moral choices? We aimed to conduct the first controlled study of the effects of ordinary philosophical ethics classes on real-world moral choices, using non-self-report, non-laboratory behavior as the dependent measure. We assigned 1332 students in four large philosophy classes to either an experimental group on the ethics of eating meat or a control group on the ethics of charitable giving. Students in each group read a philosophy article on their assigned topic and optionally viewed a related video, then met with teaching assistants for 50-minute group discussion sections. They expressed their opinions about meat ethics and charitable giving in a follow-up questionnaire (1032 respondents after exclusions). We obtained 13,642 food purchase receipts from campus restaurants for 495 of the students, before and after the intervention. Purchase of meat products declined in the experimental group (52% of purchases of at least $4.99 contained meat before the intervention, compared to 45% after) but remained the same in the control group (52% both before and after). Ethical opinion also differed, with 43% of students in the experimental group agreeing that eating the meat of factory farmed animals is unethical compared to 29% in the control group. We also attempted to measure food choice using vouchers, but voucher redemption rates were low and no effect was statistically detectable. It remains unclear what aspect of instruction influenced behavior.
KW - Consumer choice
KW - Ethics instruction
KW - Experimental philosophy
KW - Moral psychology
KW - Moral reasoning
KW - Vegetarianism
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85088658749&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85088658749&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104397
DO - 10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104397
M3 - Article
C2 - 32721655
AN - SCOPUS:85088658749
SN - 0010-0277
VL - 203
JO - Cognition
JF - Cognition
M1 - 104397
ER -