Cited by 182Psychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesEthics in Business and Education

A Psychophysiological Investigation of Moral Judgment after Ventromedial Prefrontal Damage

Moretto, Giovanna, Làdavas, Elisabetta, Mattioli, Flavia, di Pellegrino, Giuseppe·2010·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

Converging evidence suggests that emotion processing mediated by ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) is necessary to prevent personal moral violations. In moral dilemmas, for example, patients with lesions in vmPFC are more willing than normal controls to approve harmful actions that maximize good consequences (e.g., utilitarian moral judgments). Yet, none of the existing studies has measured subjects' emotional responses while they considered moral dilemmas. Therefore, a direct link between emotion processing and moral judgment is still lacking. Here, vmPFC patients and control participants considered moral dilemmas while skin conductance response (SCR) was measured as a somatic index of affective state. Replicating previous evidence, vmPFC patients approved more personal moral violations than did controls. Critically, we found that, unlike control participants, vmPFC patients failed to generate SCRs before endorsing personal moral violations. In addition, such anticipatory SCRs correlated negatively with the frequency of utilitarian judgments in normal participants. These findings provide direct support to the hypothesis that the vmPFC promotes moral behavior by mediating the anticipation of the emotional consequences of personal moral violations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/jocn.2009.21367

Cites

81 of 81 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?

  • Neither Greene's nor Moll's concept can exhaustively explain why vmPFC patients demonstrated a rationally biased approach to solving moral dilemmas, yet an emotionally biased approach to moral cognition in an economic game.

    “Apart from that, neither Greene’s nor Moll’s concept can exhaustively explain why vmPFC patients demonstrated a rationally biased approach to solving moral dilemmas (Koenigs et al. 2007; Moretto et al. 2010), yet, an emotionally biased approach to moral cognition in an economic game (Koenigs and Tranel 2007).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moretto, G., Làdavas, E., Mattioli, F., & di Pellegrino, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Bologna (IT)
  • Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale degli Spedali Civili di Brescia (IT)
  • 1Università di Bologna, Italy
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2010-08-01
Volume
22
Issue
8
Pages
1888-1899
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2035848775
Cited by
182
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 18
FWCI
3.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) (submittedVersion)
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
ventromedial prefrontal cortex, moral judgment, ethical dilemmas, utilitarian judgment, emotional processing, skin conductance response, anticipatory emotions, psychophysiology, brain lesions
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Analysis of Variance, Brain Damage, Chronic, Brain Mapping, Decision Making, Female, Galvanic Skin Response, Humans, Judgment, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Morals, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychophysiology, Reaction Time, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Prefrontal Cortex

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