The neural basis of the interaction between theory of mind and moral judgment - PubMed (original) (raw)

Clinical Trial

. 2007 May 15;104(20):8235-40.

doi: 10.1073/pnas.0701408104. Epub 2007 May 7.

Affiliations

Clinical Trial

The neural basis of the interaction between theory of mind and moral judgment

Liane Young et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007.

Abstract

Is the basis of criminality an act that causes harm, or an act undertaken with the belief that one will cause harm? The present study takes a cognitive neuroscience approach to investigating how information about an agent's beliefs and an action's consequences contribute to moral judgment. We build on prior developmental evidence showing that these factors contribute differentially to the young child's moral judgments coupled with neurobiological evidence suggesting a role for the right temporoparietal junction (RTPJ) in belief attribution. Participants read vignettes in a 2 x 2 design: protagonists produced either a negative or neutral outcome based on the belief that they were causing the negative outcome ("negative" belief) or the neutral outcome ("neutral" belief). The RTPJ showed significant activation above baseline for all four conditions but was modulated by an interaction between belief and outcome. Specifically, the RTPJ response was highest for cases of attempted harm, where protagonists were condemned for actions that they believed would cause harm to others, even though the harm did not occur. The results not only suggest a general role for belief attribution during moral judgment, but also add detail to our understanding of the interaction between these processes at both the neural and behavioral levels.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Experimental stimuli and design. (a) Schematic representation of sample scenario. Light-colored arrows mark the combinations of “Foreshadow” and “Belief” for which the belief is false. “Foreshadow” information foreshadows whether the action will result in a negative or neutral outcome. “Belief” information states whether the protagonist holds a belief that she is in a negative situation and that action (or inaction) will result in a negative outcome (negative belief) or a belief that she is a neutral situation and that action will result in a neutral outcome (neutral belief). Sentences corresponding to each category were presented in 6-s blocks. (b) The combination of belief and outcome (as foreshadowed in “Foreshadow”) yielded a 2 × 2 design and four conditions.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

Moral judgments given by subjects on a four-point scale (1, forbidden; 4, permissible). Error bars correspond to standard error.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3.

PSC from rest in the RTPJ. (Left) Brain regions where the BOLD signal was higher for (nonmoral) stories about beliefs than (nonmoral) stories about physical representations (n = 10, random-effects analysis, P < 0.001 uncorrected). These data were used to define ROIs. (Right) The PSC in the RTPJ during the story segment when the protagonist's belief was stated (“Belief”). Error bars correspond to standard error.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hart HLA. Punishment and Responsibility. Oxford: Oxford Univ Press; 1968.
    1. Brown DE. Human Universals. New York: McGraw–Hill; 1991.
    1. Fletcher G. Basic Concepts of Criminal Law. Oxford: Oxford Univ Press; 1998.
    1. Hauser MD. Moral Minds: How Nature Designed a Universal Sense of Right and Wrong. New York: HarperCollins; 2006.
    1. Knobe J. Trends Cognit Sci. 2005;9:357–359. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources