Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36620666›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022

Caught between is and ought: The Moral Dissonance Model.

Hans Te Brake, Bart Nauta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Hans Te BrakeARQ Centre of Expertise for the Impact of Disasters and Crisis, Diemen, Netherlands.
Bart NautaARQ Centre of Expertise on War, Persecution and Violence, Diemen, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Considerable academic effort has been invested in explaining the causes of, and processes behind moral injury. These efforts are mostly focused on assessment and treatment within a clinical setting. Collective and social factors contributing to moral injury are often overlooked in current literature. This perspective article considers the role of contextual factors associated with moral injury and proposes a framework that describes their relation to individual aspects. The resulting Moral Dissonance Model (MDM) draws on existing theories and frameworks. The MDM explains how dissonance can occur when the actual behavior-the response to a morally challenging situation-contradicts with morally desirable behavior. Individual and collective factors, which change over time, contribute to the experience of dissonance. The inability to sufficiently solve dissonance can lead to moral injury, but not as a matter of course. The MDM can help to understand the underlying processes of moral distress. It raises awareness of the influence of public debate and controversy, and the resulting changing societal attitudes over time. Its implications and future use are discussed.

Indexed as

decision-makingframeworkmilitarymodelingmoral dissonancemoral distressmoral injurysocial context

Identifiers

PMID36620666
PMCPMC9816145

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.