Cited by 930Psychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesEthics in Business and Education

The neural basis of human moral cognition

Moll, Jorge, Zahn, Roland, de Oliveira-Souza, Ricardo, Krueger, Frank, Grafman, Jordan·2005·Nature Reviews Neuroscience

Abstract

Moral cognitive neuroscience is an emerging field of research that focuses on the neural basis of uniquely human forms of social cognition and behaviour. Recent functional imaging and clinical evidence indicates that a remarkably consistent network of brain regions is involved in moral cognition. These findings are fostering new interpretations of social behavioural impairments in patients with brain dysfunction, and require new approaches to enable us to understand the complex links between individuals and society. Here, we propose a cognitive neuroscience view of how cultural and context-dependent knowledge, semantic social knowledge and motivational states can be integrated to explain complex aspects of human moral cognition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrn1768

Cites

161 of 161 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Moral emotion deficits are not unique to ventromedial lesions; mesolimbic and basal forebrain lesions may also cause morally inappropriate behaviour.

    “Moral emotion deficits are not unique to patients with ventromedial lesions.Patients with lesions to mesolimbic and basal forebrain regions may also exhibit morally inappropriate behaviour (Moll et al, 2005).”

    From Affective Cognition and its Disruption in Mood Disorders (2011) · cites this paper as Moll et al, 2005

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moll, J., Zahn, R., de Oliveira-Souza, R., Krueger, F., & Grafman, J.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Grafman, Jordan
Venue
Nature Reviews Neuroscience
Published
2005-10
Volume
6
Issue
10
Pages
799-809
ISSN
  • 1471-003X (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-0048
OpenAlex
W1568809335
Cited by
930
References
160
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 57 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 76 · 2013: 73 · 2012: 51
FWCI
2.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature reviews. Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
  • FreiDok plus (Universitätsbibliothek Freiburg) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
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, neural basis of morality, moral judgment, social cognition, brain dysfunction, cultural knowledge, motivational states, ethical decision-making
MeSH terms
Brain, Cognition, Humans, Morals, Neural Pathways, Neurosciences

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