ArticleFrontiers in psychology2017
Why People with More Emotion Regulation Difficulties Made a More Deontological Judgment: The Role of Deontological Inclinations.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- When Fast Thinking Meets Bad Emotion: The Effect of Intuitive Processing Modes and Negative Moods on Moral Hypocrisy.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Emotional Responses in Clinical Ethics Consultation Decision-Making: An Exploratory Study.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Cardiac vagal modulation predicts decision-making in sacrificial and everyday moral dilemmas.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Social class and moral judgment: a process dissociation perspective.Frontiers in sociology · 2024Article
- Anticipatory Stress Increases Deontological Inclinations: The Mediating Role of Emotional Valence.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Uncovering social-contextual and individual mental health factors associated with violence via computational inference.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2021Article
- Hunger Bias or Gut Instinct? Responses to Judgments of Harm Depending on Visceral State Versus Intuitive Decision-Making.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Compassionate Conservation Clashes With Conservation Biology: Should Empathy, Compassion, and Deontological Moral Principles Drive Conservation Practice?Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Chronic Stress and Moral Decision-Making: An Exploration With the CNI Model.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies have demonstrated the key role of emotion in moral judgment, and explored the relationship between emotion regulation and moral judgment. The present study investigated the influence of individual differences in emotion regulation difficulties on moral judgment. Study 1 examined whether individuals with high emotion regulation difficulties made a more deontological judgment. Study 2 explored the underlying mechanism using a process-dissociation approach, examining whether deontological inclinations and utilitarian inclinations separately or jointly accounted for the association. The results indicated that individuals with high emotion regulation difficulties rated the utilitarian actions less morally appropriate, and one's deontological inclinations mediated the association between emotion regulation difficulties and moral judgment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.