Correction: People making deontological judgments in the Trapdoor dilemma are perceived to be more prosocial in economic games than they actually are

Abstract

In Fig 1, the columns that depict the average amount transferred by Player A to Player B as a function of whether Player B is a Trapdoor-deontologist or a Trapdoor-consequentialist report incorrect values. The average amounts should be 57.7% and 69.2%. Please see the correct Fig 1 here. 10.1371/journal.pone.0225850.g001 Fig 1 Deontologists are perceived to be more trustworthy than consequentialists, but they are actually not. The pair of columns on the left-hand side reports the average amount transferred back by Player B to Player A in the Trust Game as a function of whether Player B is a Trapdoor-deontologist or a Trapdoor-consequentialist. The pair of columns on the right-hand side reports the average amount transferred by Player A to Player B, as a function of whether Player B is a Trapdoor-deontologist or a Trapdoor-consequentialist. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean.