Department of Philosophy, Classics, History of Art and Ideas, University of Oslo, Norway.
Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Norway.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2020 Oct;15(4):292-297. doi: 10.1177/1556264620911234. Epub 2020 Mar 19.
We tested whether responses to trolley problems by nurse specialist students correlated with their responses to hypothetical vaccine problems, as a follow-up to a similar study on ethics committees. No statistically significant correlation was found between the trolley and vaccination scores. These results confirmed and strengthened the finding of a very weak correlation (possibly zero), and the point estimate was even lower than for the ethics committees. Hence, the nurse specialists' responses to the trolley problems cannot be used to indicate any direction for their responses to the vaccine problems, although there is a common core issue of sacrificing some for many. The respondents reported a relatively high willingness to push one man in front of a trolley to save five. They also reported a high willingness to act in trolley dilemmas compared with vaccination dilemmas, although the dimensions of risk-reward ratios and consent heavily favored the latter.
我们测试了护士专家学生对电车问题的反应是否与他们对假设疫苗问题的反应相关，这是对伦理委员会类似研究的后续。在电车和疫苗问题的分数之间没有发现统计学上显著的相关性。这些结果证实并加强了相关性非常弱（可能为零）的发现，而且点估计甚至低于伦理委员会。因此，护士专家对电车问题的反应不能用于表明他们对疫苗问题的反应方向，尽管存在为了多数人牺牲少数人的共同核心问题。受访者报告说，他们相对愿意把一个人推到电车前面以拯救五个人。与疫苗困境相比，他们也报告了在电车困境中更愿意采取行动的意愿，尽管风险回报比和同意的维度严重偏向后者。
