Ere more likely to deliver utilitarian judgments on personal moral scenarios

Ere more likely to deliver utilitarian judgments on personal moral scenarios [45]. Moreover, under cognitive load, utilitarian decision-making was rendered slower [11], while non-utilitarian decision-making was unaffected. In fact, moral judgments are altered when cognitive control is impaired by manipulating response time, including when Avermectin B1aMedChemExpress Avermectin B1a participants are forced to respond to a moral dilemma within seconds versus within minutes [28]. Finally, utilitarian versus non-utilitarian judgment elicited higher activity in anterior cingulate cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, brain regions associated with abstract reasoning and cognitive control [12]. These results suggest that utilitarians may be able to deliver utilitarian moral judgments primarily because of their greater cognitive control over gut emotional responses. In conjunction with recent research, our findings support an alternative route to utilitarian moral decision-making in a neurotypical population and add important cognitive detail. Diminished emotional responses, specifically, reduced empathic concern, appear to be critical in facilitating utilitarian responses to moral dilemmas of high emotional salience. Recent findings, using behavioral priming methods, are consistent with this proposal. In one study, participants who viewed a humorous video before responding to the personal footbridge dilemma were more likely to endorse pushing the man off the footbridge [15]. Diminishing the negative emotional response and perhaps also the empathic concern for the potential victim via extraneous positive affect may have enabled utilitarian responding. Other work has identified that irreverence, specifically, rather than awe or elevation, leads to more utilitarian moral judgments [46]. In fact, utilitarian judgments are even predicted by participants’ level of emotional arousal: in recent work, utilitarian moral judgments were associated with lower autonomic arousal, as measured via electrodermal activity of skin conductance in response to moral scenarios [47,48]. Convergent neuropsychological evidence also reveals that patient populations characterized by deficits in social emotions show abnormally utilitarian judgment. Patients with damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) are more likely to endorse harming one to save many [18,19]. Patients with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) are also more likely to deliver utilitarian judgments relative to patients with other dementias and healthy controls [20]. Notably, utilitarian responders within the bvFTD population show diminished performance specifically on tasks probing emotional empathy [49]. Extensive work supports the role of emotion in moral development as well as moral cognition at the mature state [50?2]. Individual differences in empathic concern may also interact with different cognitive and neural mechanisms for moral judgment. For instance, pharmacologically enhanced levels of serotonin, a neurotransmitter implicated in prosocial behavior, influence the moral judgment of individuals high in trait empathy, leading to more deontological moral judgment, whereas individuals low in trait empathy are buy Shikonin relatively unaffected by altered serotonin levels [53]. Furthermore, a recent study by Conway and Gawronsky [54] has shed light on the differential influence of cognitive load and empathy enhancement on moral judgment. Asking participants to complete a working memory task while responding to moral dilemmas.Ere more likely to deliver utilitarian judgments on personal moral scenarios [45]. Moreover, under cognitive load, utilitarian decision-making was rendered slower [11], while non-utilitarian decision-making was unaffected. In fact, moral judgments are altered when cognitive control is impaired by manipulating response time, including when participants are forced to respond to a moral dilemma within seconds versus within minutes [28]. Finally, utilitarian versus non-utilitarian judgment elicited higher activity in anterior cingulate cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, brain regions associated with abstract reasoning and cognitive control [12]. These results suggest that utilitarians may be able to deliver utilitarian moral judgments primarily because of their greater cognitive control over gut emotional responses. In conjunction with recent research, our findings support an alternative route to utilitarian moral decision-making in a neurotypical population and add important cognitive detail. Diminished emotional responses, specifically, reduced empathic concern, appear to be critical in facilitating utilitarian responses to moral dilemmas of high emotional salience. Recent findings, using behavioral priming methods, are consistent with this proposal. In one study, participants who viewed a humorous video before responding to the personal footbridge dilemma were more likely to endorse pushing the man off the footbridge [15]. Diminishing the negative emotional response and perhaps also the empathic concern for the potential victim via extraneous positive affect may have enabled utilitarian responding. Other work has identified that irreverence, specifically, rather than awe or elevation, leads to more utilitarian moral judgments [46]. In fact, utilitarian judgments are even predicted by participants’ level of emotional arousal: in recent work, utilitarian moral judgments were associated with lower autonomic arousal, as measured via electrodermal activity of skin conductance in response to moral scenarios [47,48]. Convergent neuropsychological evidence also reveals that patient populations characterized by deficits in social emotions show abnormally utilitarian judgment. Patients with damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) are more likely to endorse harming one to save many [18,19]. Patients with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) are also more likely to deliver utilitarian judgments relative to patients with other dementias and healthy controls [20]. Notably, utilitarian responders within the bvFTD population show diminished performance specifically on tasks probing emotional empathy [49]. Extensive work supports the role of emotion in moral development as well as moral cognition at the mature state [50?2]. Individual differences in empathic concern may also interact with different cognitive and neural mechanisms for moral judgment. For instance, pharmacologically enhanced levels of serotonin, a neurotransmitter implicated in prosocial behavior, influence the moral judgment of individuals high in trait empathy, leading to more deontological moral judgment, whereas individuals low in trait empathy are relatively unaffected by altered serotonin levels [53]. Furthermore, a recent study by Conway and Gawronsky [54] has shed light on the differential influence of cognitive load and empathy enhancement on moral judgment. Asking participants to complete a working memory task while responding to moral dilemmas.