Cargando…

Asking ‘why?’ enhances theory of mind when evaluating harm but not purity violations

Recent work in psychology and neuroscience has revealed important differences in the cognitive processes underlying judgments of harm and purity violations. In particular, research has demonstrated that whether a violation was committed intentionally vs accidentally has a larger impact on moral judg...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dungan, James A, Young, Liane
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6778829/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31269193
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsz048
_version_ 1783456830443225088
author Dungan, James A
Young, Liane
author_facet Dungan, James A
Young, Liane
author_sort Dungan, James A
collection PubMed
description Recent work in psychology and neuroscience has revealed important differences in the cognitive processes underlying judgments of harm and purity violations. In particular, research has demonstrated that whether a violation was committed intentionally vs accidentally has a larger impact on moral judgments of harm violations (e.g. assault) than purity violations (e.g. incest). Here, we manipulate the instructions provided to participants for a moral judgment task to further probe the boundary conditions of this intent effect. Specifically, we instructed participants undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging to attend to either a violator’s mental states (why they acted that way) or their low-level behavior (how they acted) before delivering moral judgments. Results revealed that task instructions enhanced rather than diminished differences between how harm and purity violations are processed in brain regions for mental state reasoning or theory of mind. In particular, activity in the right temporoparietal junction increased when participants were instructed to attend to why vs how a violator acted to a greater extent for harm than for purity violations. This result constrains the potential accounts of why intentions matter less for purity violations compared to harm violations and provide further insight into the differences between distinct moral norms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6778829
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67788292019-10-10 Asking ‘why?’ enhances theory of mind when evaluating harm but not purity violations Dungan, James A Young, Liane Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci Original Manuscript Recent work in psychology and neuroscience has revealed important differences in the cognitive processes underlying judgments of harm and purity violations. In particular, research has demonstrated that whether a violation was committed intentionally vs accidentally has a larger impact on moral judgments of harm violations (e.g. assault) than purity violations (e.g. incest). Here, we manipulate the instructions provided to participants for a moral judgment task to further probe the boundary conditions of this intent effect. Specifically, we instructed participants undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging to attend to either a violator’s mental states (why they acted that way) or their low-level behavior (how they acted) before delivering moral judgments. Results revealed that task instructions enhanced rather than diminished differences between how harm and purity violations are processed in brain regions for mental state reasoning or theory of mind. In particular, activity in the right temporoparietal junction increased when participants were instructed to attend to why vs how a violator acted to a greater extent for harm than for purity violations. This result constrains the potential accounts of why intentions matter less for purity violations compared to harm violations and provide further insight into the differences between distinct moral norms. Oxford University Press 2019-07-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6778829/ /pubmed/31269193 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsz048 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Manuscript
Dungan, James A
Young, Liane
Asking ‘why?’ enhances theory of mind when evaluating harm but not purity violations
title Asking ‘why?’ enhances theory of mind when evaluating harm but not purity violations
title_full Asking ‘why?’ enhances theory of mind when evaluating harm but not purity violations
title_fullStr Asking ‘why?’ enhances theory of mind when evaluating harm but not purity violations
title_full_unstemmed Asking ‘why?’ enhances theory of mind when evaluating harm but not purity violations
title_short Asking ‘why?’ enhances theory of mind when evaluating harm but not purity violations
title_sort asking ‘why?’ enhances theory of mind when evaluating harm but not purity violations
topic Original Manuscript
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6778829/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31269193
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsz048
work_keys_str_mv AT dunganjamesa askingwhyenhancestheoryofmindwhenevaluatingharmbutnotpurityviolations
AT youngliane askingwhyenhancestheoryofmindwhenevaluatingharmbutnotpurityviolations