The scale consists of 9 items in two subscales. The first subscale–Impartial Beneficence (OUSIB)–consists of 5 items that all tap endorsement of the impartial maximization of the greater good, even at the cost of personal self-sacrifice. The second subscale was labeled Instrumental Harm (OUS-IH). This subscale consists of 4 items that all tap into a willingness to cause harm to bring about the greater good.
Indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = neither agree nor disagree, 7 = strongly agree)
A 7-point Likert scale with at least 3 of the response options labeled: 1 = strongly disagree, 4 = neither agree nor disagree, 7 = strongly agree.
| item_nr | item | subscale | reverse |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | If the only way to save another person’s life during an emergency is to sacrifice one’s own leg, then one is morally required to make this sacrifice. | Impartial Beneficence | 0 |
| 2 | It is morally right to harm an innocent person if harming them is a necessary means to helping several other innocent people. | Instrumental Harm | 0 |
| 3 | From a moral point of view, we should feel obliged to give one of our kidneys to a person with kidney failure since we don’t need two kidneys to survive, but really only one to be healthy. | Impartial Beneficence | 0 |
| 4 | If the only way to ensure the overall well-being and happiness of the people is through the use of political oppression for a short, limited period, then political oppression should be used. | Instrumental Harm | 0 |
| 5 | From a moral perspective, people should care about the well-being of all human beings on the planet equally; they should not favor the well-being of people who are especially close to them either physically or emotionally. | Impartial Beneficence | 0 |
| 6 | It is permissible to torture an innocent person if this would be necessary to provide information to prevent a bomb going off that would kill hundreds of people. | Instrumental Harm | 0 |
| 7 | It is just as wrong to fail to help someone as it is to actively harm them yourself. | Impartial Beneficence | 0 |
| 8 | Sometimes it is morally necessary for innocent people to die as collateral damage if more people are saved overall. | Instrumental Harm | 0 |
| 9 | It is morally wrong to keep money that one doesn’t really need if one can donate it to causes that provide effective help to those who will benefit a great deal. | Impartial Beneficence | 0 |
Kahane, G., Everett, J. A. C., Earp, B. D., Caviola, L., Faber, N. S., Crockett, M. J., & Savulescu, J. (2018). Beyond sacrificial harm: A two-dimensional model of utilitarian psychology. Psychological Review, 125(2), 131–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000093