Abstract
Recent findings in the field of moral psychology suggest that moral judgment results both from emotional processing and deliberate reasoning. The experimental study uses artificial situations that pose moral dilemmas – a human life have to be sacrificed in order to save more lives. Two factors (physical directness of harm and inevitability of death) are varied in order to explore potential differences in emotional processing and their effects on judgment. Multimodal data is collected and analyzed: moral judgments, skin conductance (as a somatic index of affective processing), and response times (as providing information on deliberation process). Personal-impersonal distinction and inevitability of death are found to influence emotions and judgments in moral dilemmas.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Foot, P.: The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect. Virtues and Vices. Basil Blackwell, Oxford (1978)
Greene, J.D., Sommerville, R.B., Nystrom, L.E., Darley, J.M., Cohen, J.D.: An fMRI Investigation of Emotional Engagement in Moral Judgment. Science 293, 2105–2108 (2001)
Greene, J.D., Nystrom, L.E., Engell, A.D., Darley, J.M., Cohen, J.D.: The Neural Bases of Cognitive Conflict and Control in Moral Judgment. Neuron 44, 389–400 (2004)
Mikhail, J.: Universal Moral Grammar: Theory, Evidence and the Future. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 114, 143–152 (2007)
Haidt, J.: The emotional dog and its rational tail: A Social Intuitionist Approach to Moral Judgment. Psychological Review 108, 814–834 (2001)
McGuire, J., Langdon, R., Coltheart, M., Mackenzie, C.: A Reanalysis of the Personal/Impersonal Distinction in Moral Psychology Research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45, 577–580 (2009)
Moore, A., Clark, B., Kane, M.: Who shalt not kill?: Individual Differences in Working Memory Capacity, Executive Control, and Moral Judgment. Psychological Science 19, 549–557 (2008)
Figner, B., Murphy, R.O.: Using Skin Conductance in Judgment and Decision Making Research. In: Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., Kuehberger, A., Ranyard, R. (eds.) A Handbook of Process Tracing Methods for Decision Research. Psychology Press, New York (2010)
Naqvi, N.H., Bechara, A.: Skin Conductance: A Psychophysiological Approach to the Study of Decision Making. In: Senior, C., Russell, T., Gazzaniga, M.S. (eds.) Methods in Mind. MIT Press (2006)
Greene, J.D., Morelli, S.A., Lowenberg, K., Nystrom, L.E., Cohen, J.D.: Cognitive Load Selectively Interferes with Utilitarian Moral Judgment. Cognition 107, 1144–1154 (2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hristova, E., Kadreva, V., Grinberg, M. (2014). Emotions and Moral Judgment: A Multimodal Analysis. In: Bassis, S., Esposito, A., Morabito, F. (eds) Recent Advances of Neural Network Models and Applications. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 26. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04129-2_42
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04129-2_42
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-04128-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-04129-2
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)