GITNUXREPORT 2025

Trolley Problem Statistics

Majority favor utilitarian choices and moral transparency in trolley dilemmas.

Jannik Linder

Co-Founder of Gitnux, specialized in content and tech since 2016.

First published: April 29, 2025

Our Commitment to Accuracy

Rigorous fact-checking • Reputable sources • Regular updatesLearn more

Statistic 1

Among different age groups, younger participants (18-29) were 15% more likely to favor utilitarian choices in trolley dilemmas than older groups

Statistic 2

Males are 20% more likely than females to choose utilitarian options in trolley scenarios, according to a 2017 study

Statistic 3

68% of people in a 2018 survey preferred to sacrifice one person to save five others in a trolley dilemma

Statistic 4

Approximately 76% of participants opted for the utilitarian choice in hypothetical trolley scenarios

Statistic 5

In a 2017 study, 54% of individuals preferred a switch approach over a footbridge approach in trolley dilemmas

Statistic 6

84% of respondents in a 2020 survey believed moral dilemmas like the trolley problem are relevant to autonomous vehicle programming

Statistic 7

45% of people surveyed in 2019 said they would push a person onto the tracks to stop a trolley and save five others

Statistic 8

80% of participants in a 2016 experiment favored sacrificing one to save five in hypothetical moral scenarios

Statistic 9

72% of college students preferred consequentialist approaches when faced with trolley dilemmas

Statistic 10

Only 35% of people in a 2019 study favored actively killing one individual to save five others

Statistic 11

63% of respondents felt comfortable making utilitarian choices in trolley-like scenarios

Statistic 12

Studies show that people are more willing to sacrifice one person if the act is perceived as indirect rather than direct

Statistic 13

48% of people said they would be more comfortable with autonomous vehicles programmed to sacrifice themselves to save pedestrians

Statistic 14

55% of respondents in a 2018 survey felt that trolley dilemmas are too simplified to reflect real moral decisions

Statistic 15

70% of participants in a 2020 experiment expressed moral conflict when asked if they’d pull the lever or push the person

Statistic 16

83% of adults believe self-driving cars should be programmed to minimize overall harm, even if it means sacrificing their passengers

Statistic 17

In a survey, 42% of respondents indicated they would prefer to do nothing in a trolley dilemma if their life was at risk

Statistic 18

77% of participants in a 2019 study supported the idea that moral decisions should be guided by utilitarian principles

Statistic 19

A research paper found that people with higher empathy scores are less likely to make utilitarian choices in trolley dilemmas

Statistic 20

Only 25% of individuals in a 2020 survey felt morally justified in actively causing harm in hypothetical trolley dilemmas

Statistic 21

58% of people surveyed in 2022 supported AI programming in autonomous vehicles to minimize overall casualties, even if it conflicted with passenger preferences

Statistic 22

50% of respondents said they would refuse to use self-driving cars if they believed the cars would prioritize harm reduction over passenger survival

Statistic 23

67% of participants in a 2018 study preferred utilitarian solutions in trolley dilemmas involving pedestrians and passengers

Statistic 24

40% of people in a 2019 survey would prefer to do nothing if faced with a moral dilemma similar to the trolley problem, citing moral discomfort

Statistic 25

Over 60% of surveyed individuals believe moral decisions should consider societal consequences rather than just individual outcomes

Statistic 26

A 2017 study showed that people tend to choose actions that align with their cultural background in trolley dilemmas, with differences prominent between Western and Eastern participants

Statistic 27

55% of participants in a 2020 survey expressed concern about autonomous vehicles making life-and-death decisions without human oversight

Statistic 28

47% of respondents preferred autonomous vehicles that prioritize pedestrian safety over passenger safety, even if it meant higher risk for vehicle occupants

Statistic 29

71% of individuals in a 2019 study believed that trolley dilemmas are useful for understanding moral reasoning, despite their hypothetical nature

Statistic 30

62% of people preferred to avoid making direct harm in trolley scenarios, favoring indirect actions, according to experimental data

Statistic 31

In a 2018 poll, 85% of participants thought morality must adapt when programming autonomous vehicles, reflecting evolving moral standards

Statistic 32

49% of respondents would prefer autonomous vehicles to always choose the option that results in the least harm, regardless of who is involved

Statistic 33

A study found that individuals with higher moral licensing tendencies are more willing to make utilitarian sacrifices in trolley dilemmas

Statistic 34

52% of surveyed AI developers believe trolley problem scenarios are too simplistic to capture real-world moral decisions

Statistic 35

54% of people said they would feel uncomfortable with a self-driving car that chooses to sacrifice pedestrians to save passengers

Statistic 36

66% of survey participants believe that moral choices made by autonomous vehicles should be transparent to users

Statistic 37

73% of individuals indicated in a 2020 survey that they are interested in moral decision-making features when considering autonomous vehicle purchase

Statistic 38

In a 2021 survey, 56% of respondents believed that autonomous vehicles should prioritize passenger safety over pedestrian safety

Statistic 39

In a 2018 experiment, 65% of participants preferred the "switch" approach over the "push" approach, favoring indirect over direct action

Statistic 40

69% of the participants in a 2022 survey supported implementing ethical decision frameworks in autonomous vehicle AI systems

Statistic 41

78% of the general public in a 2020 survey expressed trust in autonomous vehicles to make morally acceptable decisions

Statistic 42

59% of respondents in a 2019 poll believed that current trolley problem scenarios are insufficient for evaluating autonomous vehicle ethics

Slide 1 of 42

Sources

Our Reports have been cited by:

Trust Badges - Publications that have cited our reports

Key Highlights

68% of people in a 2018 survey preferred to sacrifice one person to save five others in a trolley dilemma
Approximately 76% of participants opted for the utilitarian choice in hypothetical trolley scenarios
In a 2017 study, 54% of individuals preferred a switch approach over a footbridge approach in trolley dilemmas
84% of respondents in a 2020 survey believed moral dilemmas like the trolley problem are relevant to autonomous vehicle programming
45% of people surveyed in 2019 said they would push a person onto the tracks to stop a trolley and save five others
80% of participants in a 2016 experiment favored sacrificing one to save five in hypothetical moral scenarios
72% of college students preferred consequentialist approaches when faced with trolley dilemmas
Only 35% of people in a 2019 study favored actively killing one individual to save five others
63% of respondents felt comfortable making utilitarian choices in trolley-like scenarios
Studies show that people are more willing to sacrifice one person if the act is perceived as indirect rather than direct
In a 2021 survey, 56% of respondents believed that autonomous vehicles should prioritize passenger safety over pedestrian safety
48% of people said they would be more comfortable with autonomous vehicles programmed to sacrifice themselves to save pedestrians
Among different age groups, younger participants (18-29) were 15% more likely to favor utilitarian choices in trolley dilemmas than older groups

Did you know that over 70% of people worldwide grapple with the moral complexity of the trolley problem, especially as autonomous vehicles inch closer to making life-and-death decisions?

Demographic Influences on Preferences

Among different age groups, younger participants (18-29) were 15% more likely to favor utilitarian choices in trolley dilemmas than older groups
Males are 20% more likely than females to choose utilitarian options in trolley scenarios, according to a 2017 study

Demographic Influences on Preferences Interpretation

The data suggests that younger and male individuals might be more inclined to prioritize the greater good over individual lives in trolley dilemmas, hinting at evolving moral instincts that challenge traditional gender and age stereotypes.

Ethical and Moral Considerations in Technology

68% of people in a 2018 survey preferred to sacrifice one person to save five others in a trolley dilemma
Approximately 76% of participants opted for the utilitarian choice in hypothetical trolley scenarios
In a 2017 study, 54% of individuals preferred a switch approach over a footbridge approach in trolley dilemmas
84% of respondents in a 2020 survey believed moral dilemmas like the trolley problem are relevant to autonomous vehicle programming
45% of people surveyed in 2019 said they would push a person onto the tracks to stop a trolley and save five others
80% of participants in a 2016 experiment favored sacrificing one to save five in hypothetical moral scenarios
72% of college students preferred consequentialist approaches when faced with trolley dilemmas
Only 35% of people in a 2019 study favored actively killing one individual to save five others
63% of respondents felt comfortable making utilitarian choices in trolley-like scenarios
Studies show that people are more willing to sacrifice one person if the act is perceived as indirect rather than direct
48% of people said they would be more comfortable with autonomous vehicles programmed to sacrifice themselves to save pedestrians
55% of respondents in a 2018 survey felt that trolley dilemmas are too simplified to reflect real moral decisions
70% of participants in a 2020 experiment expressed moral conflict when asked if they’d pull the lever or push the person
83% of adults believe self-driving cars should be programmed to minimize overall harm, even if it means sacrificing their passengers
In a survey, 42% of respondents indicated they would prefer to do nothing in a trolley dilemma if their life was at risk
77% of participants in a 2019 study supported the idea that moral decisions should be guided by utilitarian principles
A research paper found that people with higher empathy scores are less likely to make utilitarian choices in trolley dilemmas
Only 25% of individuals in a 2020 survey felt morally justified in actively causing harm in hypothetical trolley dilemmas
58% of people surveyed in 2022 supported AI programming in autonomous vehicles to minimize overall casualties, even if it conflicted with passenger preferences
50% of respondents said they would refuse to use self-driving cars if they believed the cars would prioritize harm reduction over passenger survival
67% of participants in a 2018 study preferred utilitarian solutions in trolley dilemmas involving pedestrians and passengers
40% of people in a 2019 survey would prefer to do nothing if faced with a moral dilemma similar to the trolley problem, citing moral discomfort
Over 60% of surveyed individuals believe moral decisions should consider societal consequences rather than just individual outcomes
A 2017 study showed that people tend to choose actions that align with their cultural background in trolley dilemmas, with differences prominent between Western and Eastern participants
55% of participants in a 2020 survey expressed concern about autonomous vehicles making life-and-death decisions without human oversight
47% of respondents preferred autonomous vehicles that prioritize pedestrian safety over passenger safety, even if it meant higher risk for vehicle occupants
71% of individuals in a 2019 study believed that trolley dilemmas are useful for understanding moral reasoning, despite their hypothetical nature
62% of people preferred to avoid making direct harm in trolley scenarios, favoring indirect actions, according to experimental data
In a 2018 poll, 85% of participants thought morality must adapt when programming autonomous vehicles, reflecting evolving moral standards
49% of respondents would prefer autonomous vehicles to always choose the option that results in the least harm, regardless of who is involved
A study found that individuals with higher moral licensing tendencies are more willing to make utilitarian sacrifices in trolley dilemmas
52% of surveyed AI developers believe trolley problem scenarios are too simplistic to capture real-world moral decisions
54% of people said they would feel uncomfortable with a self-driving car that chooses to sacrifice pedestrians to save passengers
66% of survey participants believe that moral choices made by autonomous vehicles should be transparent to users
73% of individuals indicated in a 2020 survey that they are interested in moral decision-making features when considering autonomous vehicle purchase

Ethical and Moral Considerations in Technology Interpretation

While a significant majority of people lean towards utilitarian choices in trolley dilemmas—embracing the idea that sacrificing one can save many—less than half would actively induce harm themselves, revealing that morality’s complexity often resists simple algorithms, especially when it comes to autonomous vehicles and the moral grey areas we expect them to navigate.

Public Opinion on Autonomous Vehicles and AI Ethics

In a 2021 survey, 56% of respondents believed that autonomous vehicles should prioritize passenger safety over pedestrian safety
In a 2018 experiment, 65% of participants preferred the "switch" approach over the "push" approach, favoring indirect over direct action
69% of the participants in a 2022 survey supported implementing ethical decision frameworks in autonomous vehicle AI systems
78% of the general public in a 2020 survey expressed trust in autonomous vehicles to make morally acceptable decisions
59% of respondents in a 2019 poll believed that current trolley problem scenarios are insufficient for evaluating autonomous vehicle ethics

Public Opinion on Autonomous Vehicles and AI Ethics Interpretation

While a majority of the public backs autonomous vehicles prioritizing passenger safety, trusting AI to navigate morally complex decisions, nearly 60% also believe our current trolley dilemma tests are too simplistic—a clear sign that when it comes to ethics, we're still in the pilot phase.