Cited by 95Psychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesEthics in Business and Education

The neuroscience of moral cognition: from dual processes to dynamic systems

Van Bavel, Jay J, FeldmanHall, Oriel, Mende-Siedlecki, Peter·2015·Current Opinion in Psychology

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.08.009

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Social information serves as input for cognitive and emotional processes in moral judgment and decision-making.

    “Furthermore, social information serves as input for cognitive and emotional processes in moral judgment and decision-making (4).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Van Bavel, J. J., FeldmanHall, O., & Mende-Siedlecki, P.
Affiliations
New York University (US)
Venue
Current Opinion in Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-12
Volume
6
Pages
167-172
ISSN
2352-250X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1184194730
Cited by
95
References
74
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
0.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Current Opinion in Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
Keywords
moral cognition, dual-process theory, dynamical systems theory, moral intuitions, moral reasoning, social environment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review