ArticleBehavior genetics2019
Behavioral Genetics and Attributions of Moral Responsibility.
Article in Behavior genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- No Argument with Biology? The Effects of Genetic Explanations for Socioeconomic Outcomes on American and Swedish Citizens' Attitudes Towards Government Intervention.Behavior genetics · 2026Article
- "DNA Doesn't Lie:" Genetic Essentialism and Determinism in Law & Order: Special Victims Unit.The Journal of medical humanities · 2025Article
- Philosophy of psychiatry: theoretical advances and clinical implications.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2024Article
- Genetic determinism, essentialism and reductionism: semantic clarity for contested science.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2023Review
- Out of their minds? Externalist challenges for using AI in forensic psychiatry.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Review
- The effect of neuroscientific evidence on sentencing depends on how one conceives of reasons for incarceration.PloS one · 2022Article
- Genetic attributions and perceptions of naturalness are shaped by evaluative valence.The Journal of social psychology · 2021Article
- Asymmetrical genetic attributions for prosocial versus antisocial behaviour.Nature human behaviour · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While considerable research has examined how genetic explanations for behavior impact assessments of moral responsibility, results across studies have been inconsistent. Some studies suggest that genetic accounts diminish ascriptions of responsibility, but others show no effect. Nonetheless, conclusions from behavior genetics are increasingly mobilized on behalf of defendants in court, suggesting a widespread intuition that this sort of information is relevant to assessments of blameworthiness. In this paper, we consider two sorts of reasons why this kind of intuition, if it exists, is not consistently revealed in empirical studies. On the one hand, people may have complex and internally conflicting intuitions about the relationship between behavior genetics and moral responsibility. On the other hand, it may be that people are motivated to think about the role of genetics in behavior differently depending on the moral valence of the actions in question.
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.