New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Famous "Trolley Problem" Exposes Moral Instincts

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

A trolley is hurtling down a track, and if nobody intervenes it will hit and kill five people. Psychologists use variations on this hypothetical situation to gauge people's gut reactions about morality. Here are three scenarios:

  • The driver could switch the train to another track, on which one man stands. Should the driver reroute the trolley?

  • Now suppose the trolley is driverless and you are a bystander. Should you hit a switch to divert the trolley so it hits the lone man?

  • You are standing above the tracks on a bridge. You could stop the trolley and save the five people by pushing a large man to his death in front of the trolley. Would you push him?

Most people say that the driver should reroute the train and that they would reroute the train with the switch but that they would not push the man to his death. This typical decision is associated with increased activity in the medial prefrontal cortex (green), which indicates a strong negative emotional reaction, as well as activity in the amygdala (red), which is involved in processing emotions and stressful events.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Some people do decide to push the man. This decision is associated with the following:

  • Increased activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (yellow), a center for cognitive control and reasoning.

  • Frontotemporal dementia. Patients with such damage to the frontal lobe (gray dashes) and temporal lobe (gray dots) show blunted emotions.

  • Ventromedial prefrontal lesions. People with this condition have less activity in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (blue) and respond less emotionally overall.

  • High-functioning autism or Asperger's syndrome. Patients with these conditions often have impairments in emotional processing and social awareness.

  • Positive emotion induction. Healthy individuals shown a funny movie clip first are more likely to say they would push the man.

  • Prejudice. College-age study participants were more likely to say “yes” to pushing the man if he was described as an outsider (for instance, homeless, disabled, drug addicted or elderly) and if the five people to be saved were part of an in-crowd (American and young).

Can't decide? People who feel deeply divided on a moral issue show increased activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (purple), which is associated with internal conflict.

Victoria Stern is a contributing editor at Scientific American Mind.

More by Victoria Stern
SA Mind Vol 24 Issue 5This article was published with the title “Of Trolleys and Trade-offs” in SA Mind Vol. 24 No. 5 (), p. 13
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind1113-13c

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe