ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2026
Moral Decision-Making, Machiavellianism, and Social Cognition in Autism: An Exploratory Study.
Article in Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe study explored moral decision-making in autistic and neurotypical individuals through a set of moral dilemmas that varied in the intentionality of harm and personal risk involvement. In addition, the role of Theory of Mind (ToM), empathy, and Machiavellian attitudes was explored.
methodsTwenty autistic (mean chronological age 21.60 ± 8.10; mean years of education 12.40 ± 1.93) and twenty-nine neurotypical (mean chronological age 22.28 ± 2.8; mean years of education 14.38 ± 2.27) adolescents and adults participated in the study. Mixed-design repeated-measures ANOVAs were conducted to examine the effects of group and dilemma characteristics. Exploratory correlations were performed between individual difference measures and utilitarian choices in both groups.
resultsOur results showed overall similar response patterns between the groups, with higher moral acceptability ratings for utilitarian actions in incidental than in instrumental dilemmas. Both groups showed a reduction in utilitarian choices in instrumental dilemmas, although this pattern was less pronounced in the autistic group. Personal risk involvement increased utilitarian choices in the neurotypical group, whereas it did not significantly influence choices in the autistic group. Autistic participants reported lower empathy and ToM abilities, whereas no significant differences emerged in Machiavellianism. Nevertheless, exploratory correlations suggested relationships between ToM, Machiavellianism, and utilitarian choices in specific dilemma conditions within each group.
conclusionMoral decision-making in autistic individuals was broadly comparable to that of neurotypical individuals in overall outcomes, while context-dependent patterns may reflect differences in how harm intentionality, personal involvement, and normative constraints are integrated into moral decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42663882What 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.