Cited by 249Psychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentForgiveness and Related BehaviorsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Innocent intentions: A correlation between forgiveness for accidental harm and neural activity☆

Young, Liane, Saxe, Rebecca·2009·Neuropsychologia

Abstract

Contemporary moral psychology often emphasizes the universality of moral judgments. Across age, gender, religion and ethnicity, people's judgments on classic dilemmas are sensitive to the same moral principles. In many cases, moral judgments depend not only on the outcome of the action, but on the agent's beliefs and intentions at the time of action. For example, we blame agents who attempt but fail to harm others, while generally forgiving agents who harm others accidentally and unknowingly. Nevertheless, as we report here, there are individual differences in the extent to which observers exculpate agents for accidental harms. Furthermore, we find that the extent to which innocent intentions are taken to mitigate blame for accidental harms is correlated with activation in a specific brain region during moral judgment. This brain region, the right temporo-parietal junction, has been previously implicated in reasoning about other people's thoughts, beliefs, and intentions in moral and non-moral contexts.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.03.020

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 67 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Young, L., & Saxe, R.
Affiliations
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Young, Liane
Venue
Neuropsychologia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-08
Volume
47
Issue
10
Pages
2065-2072
ISSN
0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2104698746
Cited by
249
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 17
FWCI
7.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Forgiveness and Related Behaviors
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
accidental harm, moral judgment, intention, forgiveness, blame, right temporoparietal junction, individual differences, moral reasoning, theory of mind
MeSH terms
Accidents, Adolescent, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Judgment, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Morals, Oxygen, Reaction Time, Statistics as Topic, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Intention, Young Adult

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