Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39091703›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

Distinguishing the role of positivity bias, cognitive impairment and emotional reactivity in the deontological preference in multiple sclerosis during moral dilemmas: a social cognition study protocol.

Laurent Zikos, Béatrice Degraeve, Antonio Pinti, Julien Poupart, Laurène Norberciak, Arnaud Kwiatkowski, Cécile Donze, Bruno Lenne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

8 authors.

Laurent ZikosExperience, Transhumanism, Human Interactions, Care & Society (ETHICS - EA7446), Lille Catholic University, Lille, France.
Béatrice DegraeveExperience, Transhumanism, Human Interactions, Care & Society (ETHICS - EA7446), Lille Catholic University, Lille, France.
Antonio PintiLaboratoire Science de l'Information-Communication (LSC/DeVisu), Université Polytechnique Hauts-de-France, Valenciennes, France.
Julien PoupartNeurology Department, Groupement des Hôpitaux de l'Institut Catholique de Lille (GHICL), Lille Catholic University, Lille, France.
Laurène NorberciakNeurology Department, Groupement des Hôpitaux de l'Institut Catholique de Lille (GHICL), Lille Catholic University, Lille, France.
Arnaud KwiatkowskiNeurology Department, Groupement des Hôpitaux de l'Institut Catholique de Lille (GHICL), Lille Catholic University, Lille, France.
Cécile DonzeRehabilitation Department, Groupement des Hôpitaux de l'Institut Catholique de Lille (GHICL), Lille Catholic University, Lille, France.
Bruno LenneNeurology Department, Groupement des Hôpitaux de l'Institut Catholique de Lille (GHICL), Lille Catholic University, Lille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory and neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system characterized by a broad and unpredictable range of symptoms, including cognitive and sociocognitive dysfunction. Among these social-cognitive functions, moral judgment has been explored in persons with MS (PwMS) using moral dilemmas, where participants must decide whether to sacrifice one person to save a greater number. Opting for such a sacrifice reflects utilitarian reasoning (sacrificing one for the benefit of many is deemed acceptable), while refusing reflects deontological reasoning (such sacrifice is considered morally wrong). Compared to controls, PwMS have been shown to make greater deontological moral choices in such dilemmas. Objectives: While PwMS have demonstrated a higher tendency for deontological moral choices in moral dilemmas compared to controls, the underlying determinants of this reasoning pattern remain unclear. In this project, we aim to investigate cognitive, emotional, and motivational factors that may explain deontological decision-making in MS. Methods and analysis: We will recruit a sample of 45 PwMS and 45 controls aged 18-55 years. The type of response, deontological or utilitarian, to a series of 20 vignettes of moral dilemmas will constitute the primary outcomes. Global cognitive performance, positivity bias, alexithymia and empathy levels as well as emotional reactivity measured by electrodermal activity (EDA) during moral dilemmas will be secondary outcomes. Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval was granted by a national ethical committee (CPP Ouest III, national number 2023-A00447-38). The project is sponsored by the ARSEP Foundation. Findings will be presented at national and international conferences, as well as published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

Indexed as

cognitioncognitive neurosciencemoral judgementmultiple sclerosisneurodegenerative diseasesneuropsychologypsychologysocial cognition

Identifiers

PMID39091703
PMCPMC11291456

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.