Abstract
Findings in the field of experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience have shed new light on our understanding of the psychological and biological bases of morality. Although a lot of attention has been devoted to understanding the processes that underlie complex moral dilemmas, attempts to represent the way in which individuals generate moral judgments when processing basic harmful actions are rare. Here, we will outline a model of morality which proposes that the evaluation of basic harmful actions relies on complex interactions between emotional arousal, Theory of Mind (ToM) capacities, and inhibitory control resources. This model makes clear predictions regarding the cognitive processes underlying the development of and ability to generate moral judgments. We draw on data from developmental and cognitive psychology, cognitive neuroscience, and psychopathology research to evaluate the model and propose several conceptual and methodological improvements that are needed to further advance our understanding of moral cognition and its development.
Highlights
Recent findings in the fields of cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience support the notion that morality is made up of multiple complex processes and implicate a widely distributed network of brain areas (Moll, Zahn, de Oliveira-souza, Krueger, & Grafman, 2005; Young & Dungan, 2011)
The extant evidence reviewed so far is in line with the model we have presented and suggests that: (i) separable systems are responsible for the causal-moral and intentional-moral evaluations in moral judgment; (ii) brain areas that have been consistently associated with affective, Theory of Mind (ToM), and inhibitory control processes are involved in moral judgment of harmful situations; but (iii) the involvement of these different brain regions differs as a function of the situation under evaluation
Findings from individuals who have high functioning autism (HFA)/Asperger syndrome (AS) add to the evidence base from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies, which indicate that brain areas associated with ToM processing, including right temporo-parietal junction (rTPJ), are implicated in the ability to exculpate an agent for his accidental harm, and with developmental studies that have demonstrated that the ability to pass the false belief task is significantly related to the ability to exculpate an agent who has committed accidental harm
Summary
Recent findings in the fields of cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience support the notion that morality is made up of multiple complex processes and implicate a widely distributed network of brain areas (Moll, Zahn, de Oliveira-souza, Krueger, & Grafman, 2005; Young & Dungan, 2011). It is clear that processes such as empathy (Reniers et al, 2012), Theory of Mind (ToM) (Young, Cushman, Hauser, & Saxe, 2007), executive control (Greene, Morelli, Lowenberg, Nystrom, & Cohen, 2008; Moore, Clark, & Kane, 2008) and abstract reasoning (Greene, Nystrom, Engell, Darley, & Cohen, 2004) are typically deployed when computing moral judgments and moral decisions Building upon this recent evidence, several authors have theorized that morality is supported by distinct evaluative systems that can act in concert, in competition, or in conflict, each resting upon specific cognitive processes, and help individuals decide what is right and what is wrong (Cushman, Young, & Greene, 2007; Cushman, 2008; Greene, 2009). Whereas individuals tend to say they would pull the lever to save five people (and give a utilitarian judgment, i.e., a judgment that focuses on the consequence of the action), most say they would not push the man to save the same number of people (and make a deontogical judgment, i.e., a Psychon Bull Rev (2016) 23:1660–1680
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
