Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35693541›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2022

The Neural Basis of Moral Judgement for Self and for Others: Evidence From Event-Related Potentials.

Qin Jiang, Linglin Zhuo, Qi Wang, Wenxia Lin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Qin JiangResearch Center of Psychology and Education, School of Marxism, Guangxi University, Nanning, China.
Linglin ZhuoResearch Center of Psychology and Education, School of Marxism, Guangxi University, Nanning, China.
Qi WangDepartment of Psychology, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Wenxia LinResearch Center of Psychology and Education, School of Marxism, Guangxi University, Nanning, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Developmental and neuroscience works have demonstrated that the moral judgment is influenced by theory of mind (ToM), which refers to the ability to represent the mental states of different agents. However, the neural and cognitive time course of interactions between moral judgment and ToM remains unclear. The present event-related potential (ERP) study investigated the underlying neural substrate of the interaction between moral judgment and ToM by contrasting the ERPs elicited by moral judgments for self and for others in moral dilemmas. In classic moral dilemmas, the agents must choose between the utilitarian choice (taking the action to kill or harm an innocent person but saving more people) and the non-utilitarian choice (taking no action to kill or harm the innocent person but letting some people die). The ERPs were recorded from participants who made moral judgments for self and for others when the agent made utilitarian or non-utilitarian choices during the dilemma. The results revealed that the moral judgment for others elicited a larger frontal late positive component (LPC, 500-900 ms) than that for self when the agents made utilitarian choices, while no difference was observed on early components of N1, P2, and N2. Moreover, individual differences in mentalizing ability were negatively correlated with the LPC amplitudes. These findings suggested that ToM modulated the late controlled process but not the early automatic process during moral judgments.

Indexed as

ERPmoral judgmentothersselftheory of mind

Identifiers

PMID35693541
PMCPMC9184798

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.