Moral dilemmas and trust in leaders during a global health crisis

Trust in leaders is a key determinant of citizen compliance with public policies, especially during times of crisis. One potential determinant of trust in leaders is how they resolve moral dilemmas that generate conflicts between utilitarian and non-utilitarian ethical principles. Past research suggests that utilitarian responses to such dilemmas can both erode and enhance trust in leaders: sacrificing some people to save many others (i.e., instrumental harm) reduces trust, while impartially maximizing the welfare of everyone equally (i.e., impartial beneficence) may increase trust. Here, we investigate how these utilitarian approaches to moral dilemmas impact trust in leaders in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Across 22 countries on 6 continents, participants will be randomly assigned to read about leaders who endorse either utilitarian or non-utilitarian principles in COVID-19 dilemmas about instrumental harm or impartial beneficence. After learning how the leaders resolve the dilemmas, participants will complete behavioral and self-reported measures of trust in those leaders. We predict that in COVID-19 dilemmas, endorsement of instrumental harm will decrease trust in leaders, while endorsement of impartial beneficence will increase trust in leaders. These results can advance our basic understanding of trust in leaders and inform effective public communication during times of crisis.