When it comes to tough moral calls, groups are way more likely to break the rules for the "greater good" than a person acting alone.
PsyArXiv · March 18, 2026 · usxme_v1
AI-generated illustration
The Takeaway
We often assume that groups are prone to 'groupthink' or lower moral standards, but this study found that group decisions are actually more sensitive to outcomes and consequences. When faced with a choice between following a rule and maximizing benefits for the most people, groups are more rational and utilitarian than individuals acting alone.
From the abstract
Moral dilemmas often involve a conflict between action-options that maximize outcomes for the greater good (utilitarianism) and inaction-options that conform to moral norms (deontology). Previous research suggests that, compared to individuals, groups show stronger support for outcome-maximizing actions that violate moral norms. The current study used a computational modeling approach to investigate whether this difference is driven by (1) stronger sensitivity to consequences, (2) weaker sensiti