Fig 1.
Time course of the experimental design, including the induction task, the moral dilemma task, and the anxiety and emotion evaluations.
Fig 2.
Examples of the progress of the animated intentional scenarios for the loss frame effect, where some individuals are sent to their inescapable fate by dynamiting a rocky pan to stop the progress of a lahar.
Notes: (A) a lava flow is about to collapse the lake; If no action: (B1) the collapsed lake would release a lahar and (B2) kill the inhabitants; If action: (C1) some individuals can be sent to a rocky pan and (C2) use dynamite to divert the course of the lahar, but (C3,C4) the individuals won’t be able to flee from the explosion and (C5) they would be killed by the explosion to save the other inhabitants; (D) participants have to use the grey bar to give their answer.
Fig 3.
Mean moral acceptability score as a function of framing (gain, loss) and (un)certainty (certainty vs. uncertainty).
Bars represent 95% CI.
Fig 4.
Relationship between state-anxiety and difference scores of moral acceptability (unintentional—intentional actions) (n = 120).