On the moral tracks: How economics and law students approach the trolley problem

Background: The impact of education sensu largo on moral development is well-documented, but research on how academic curricula shape students’ ethical decision-making remains limited. This study examines whether studying law or economics influences students’ choices in the Trolley Problem – a famous moral dilemma that requires a sacrificial choice, eliciting reflection on fundamental moral principles.Research purpose: We investigate whether economics students, who are taught to seek efficiency under scarce resources, are more likely to take an active (‘utilitarian’) approach that maximizes the number of human lives saved in a collision with a speeding train, while law students, guided by adherence to norms, are more inclined to refrain from interfering in the situation, thus opting for a passive (‘deontological’) choice that aligns with the fundamental moral principle of ‘do not kill’. We also assess whether these tendencies intensify with academic progression in economics and law studies.Methods: A total of 784 students from two Polish universities completed the Trolley Problem survey, and their responses were analyzed to identify differences between Law and Economics & Business students, as well as variations across study levels. The research was conducted in two waves, in 2020 and 2024.Conclusions: While Law and Economics & Business students’ choices in the Trolley Problem showed some differences in the expected direction, these differences were statistically insignificant. As anticipated, advanced Law students were more likely to choose the passive option. However, more advanced Economics & Business students did not exhibit a stronger ‘utilitarian’ tendency compared to their first-year colleagues, suggesting a more nuanced effect of academic training on moral choices.