ArticleScientific reports2025
Cardiac vagal modulation predicts decision-making in sacrificial and everyday moral dilemmas.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social conflict imagery induces stress, social and physical pain: sex differences in autonomic and affective responses and pathways to resilience and wellbeing.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Vagally mediated heart rate variability modulates the association between the perceived workload and the Stroop effect on behavioral performance.Physiological reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac vagal modulation indicates the self-regulatory activity of the autonomic nervous system and can thus be used to assess an individual's ability to integrate physiological, cognitive, and emotional responses in the decision-making process. In this paper, cardiac vagal modulation, quantified by heart rate variability (HRV), was used to predict decision-making in two types of moral dilemmas: First, sacrificial dilemmas which create a moral conflict between utilitarian (acting to maximise aggregate well-being by sacrifice) and deontological (rejecting the sacrifice) alternatives; second, everyday dilemmas which create a conflict between altruistic (acting non-selfish) and egoistic (acting self-centered) alternatives. HRV was analysed in 112 healthy participants before, during, and after decision-making, allowing to assess not only self-regulatory ability (resting HRV) but also self-regulatory capacities (HRV during and after decision-making). HRV predicted concrete decisions, but effects were only found in women. In sacrificial dilemmas, deontological women showed a stronger vagal withdrawal but also a faster cardiac vagal recovery compared to high utilitarian women. In everyday moral dilemmas, altruism was associated with reduced vagal outflow and increased sympathetic activity. Findings suggest differences in the acquisition of self-regulatory capacities between decision-makers in both types of moral dilemmas, which can be measured by HRV.
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.