“This makes Parisians' treatment of American tourists look good in comparison.”

“This makes Parisians' treatment of American tourists look good in comparison.”  Researchers recently posed a (supposed) moral dilemma to a number of people and measured the results.  They posed a situation in which the participant had to choose between saving the life of their own dog versus the life of a person.  They varied the degree of attachment between the participant and the person, from sibling to foreign tourist.  When they tested their own dog versus the foreign tourist, about 40% of the participants chose to save their dog.

My reaction: what the hell is wrong with the other 60%!  This seems like an easy choice to me: my dogs are far more important to me than the vast majority of humanity.  Far more worthy, in most respects, too.  The moral choice is to save my dog!

The general reaction: what the hell is wrong with that 40%!  I find this utterly appalling.  They'd let their dog, whom they love, die to save some random person with whom they have no connection?  That seems highly immoral to me.

The study.  Huffington Post discussion.  Wall Street Journal discussion.