Cited by 900Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesNonprofit Sector and Volunteering

Human fronto–mesolimbic networks guide decisions about charitable donation

Open access
Moll, Jorge, Krueger, Frank, Zahn, Roland, Pardini, Matteo, de Oliveira-Souza, Ricardo, Grafman, Jordan·2006·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Humans often sacrifice material benefits to endorse or to oppose societal causes based on moral beliefs. Charitable donation behavior, which has been the target of recent experimental economics studies, is an outstanding contemporary manifestation of this ability. Yet the neural bases of this unique aspect of human altruism, which extends beyond interpersonal interactions, remain obscure. In this article, we use functional magnetic resonance imaging while participants anonymously donated to or opposed real charitable organizations related to major societal causes. We show that the mesolimbic reward system is engaged by donations in the same way as when monetary rewards are obtained. Furthermore, medial orbitofrontal–subgenual and lateral orbitofrontal areas, which also play key roles in more primitive mechanisms of social attachment and aversion, specifically mediate decisions to donate or to oppose societal causes. Remarkably, more anterior sectors of the prefrontal cortex are distinctively recruited when altruistic choices prevail over selfish material interests.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0604475103

Cites

38 of 38 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moll, J., Krueger, F., Zahn, R., Pardini, M., de Oliveira-Souza, R., & Grafman, J.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • *Cognitive Neuroscience Section, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-1440;
  • Cognitive and Behavioral Neuroscience Unit, LABS–D’Or Hospital Network, 2228–080, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil;
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2006-10-17
Volume
103
Issue
42
Pages
15623-15628
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2123884941
Cited by
900
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 55 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 69 · 2012: 58
FWCI
16.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutial Research Information System (University of Genoa) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Nonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Keywords
charitable giving, altruism, mesolimbic reward system, orbitofrontal cortex, prefrontal cortex, ethical decision-making, social attachment, social aversion, monetary rewards
MeSH terms
Adult, Altruism, Charities, Choice Behavior, Culture, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Limbic System, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Nerve Net, Reward, Gift Giving

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