Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society

How do we know when it's OK to break moral rules? We propose that — alongside well-studied outcome-based measures of welfare and harm — people sometimes use universalization, asking "What if everyone felt at liberty to ignore the rule?'' We develop a virtual environment where agents stand in line to gather water. Subjects judge agents who get out of line to try to get water more quickly. If subjects use universalization, they would need to imagine all agents getting out of line and going straight for the water in each environment. To test this prediction, we model an action's universalizability by simulating what would happen if every agent tried to follow a path directly to the water, then evaluating the effects. We also investigate the role of several outcome-based measures, including welfare aggregation and harm-based measures. We find that universalizability plays a important role in rule-breaking judgments alongside outcome-based concerns.