ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2024
When the brain says "No!": An MRI study on the neural correlates of resistance to immoral orders.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2024. 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.
- Neuro-cognitive specificities in prosocial disobedience: A comparative fMRI study of civilian and military populations.PloS one · 2025Article
- Unraveling the neural basis of repeated moral decisions with mouse tracking and fMRI.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 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
Milgram's studies explored psychological and contextual factors influencing (dis)obedience to immoral orders, but the mechanisms preventing individuals from being coerced into causing pain to others remained largely unknown. Our fMRI study investigated the neural correlates of disobedience to such orders, focusing on three phases of the decision-making process: order processing (predecision), action (decision), and outcome and effect processing (postdecision). Within these phases we targeted three sociocognitive (cognitive conflict, sense of agency-SoA, and theory of mind-ToM) and two socioaffective (empathy and guilt) processes. Our findings revealed that participants who engaged the angular gyrus and temporoparietal junction, particularly in the left hemisphere, as well as median prefrontal areas before obeying the command to send a shock-possibly to mitigate cognitive conflict between self and other and to enhance their SoA-were more likely to disobey the experimenter's instructions to administer a shock to a victim. Additionally, we found involvement of social brain regions during the postdecision phase (encompassing ToM, empathy, and guilt areas), especially in response to shock events, to process the victim's pain. Higher activity in these regions when obeying orders was associated with a higher rate of prosocial disobedience. This study sheds light on the mechanisms that lead individuals to resist immoral actions under authoritative pressure in an experimental context.
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.