↓ Skip to main content

At the heart of morality lies neuro-visceral integration: lower cardiac vagal tone predicts utilitarian moral judgment

Overview of attention for article published in Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
32 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
Title
At the heart of morality lies neuro-visceral integration: lower cardiac vagal tone predicts utilitarian moral judgment
Published in
Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience, June 2016
DOI 10.1093/scan/nsw077
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gewnhi Park, Andreas Kappes, Yeojin Rho, Jay J. Van Bavel

Abstract

To not harm others is widely considered the most basic element of human morality. The aversion to harm others can be either rooted in the outcomes of an action (utilitarianism) or reactions to the action itself (deontology). We speculated that human moral judgments rely on the integration of neural computations of harm and visceral reactions. The present research examined whether utilitarian or deontological aspects of moral judgment are associated with cardiac vagal tone, a physiological proxy for neuro-visceral integration. We investigated the relationship between cardiac vagal tone and moral judgment by using a mix of moral dilemmas, mathematical modeling, and psychophysiological measures. An index of bipolar deontology-utilitarianism was correlated with resting heart rate variability-an index of cardiac vagal tone-such that more utilitarian judgments were associated with lower heart rate variability. Follow-up analyses using process dissociation, which independently quantifies utilitarian and deontological moral inclinations, provided further evidence that utilitarian (but not deontological) judgments were associated with lower heart rate variability. Our results suggest that the functional integration of neural and visceral systems during moral judgments can restrict outcome-based, utilitarian moral preferences. Implications for theories of moral judgment are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Luxembourg 1 1%
Unknown 84 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 26%
Student > Master 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 42 49%
Neuroscience 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Philosophy 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 18 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 July 2022.
All research outputs
#1,949,037
of 26,322,284 outputs
Outputs from Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience
#394
of 1,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,099
of 371,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience
#9
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,322,284 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,834 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 371,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.