Limits...
Modulation of incentivized dishonesty by disgust facial expressions.

Lim J, Ho PM, Mullette-Gillman OA - Front Neurosci (2015)

Bottom Line: Combining these data with those from prior experiments revealed that the effect of disgust presentation on both harm judgments and honesty could be accounted for by the same bidirectional function, with no significant effect of domain.This clearly demonstrates that disgust facial expressions produce the same modulation of moral judgments across different moral foundations (harm and honesty).Our results suggest strong overlap in the cognitive/neural processes of moral judgments across moral foundations, and provide a framework for further studies to specify the integration of emotional information in moral decision making.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Neuroscience and Behavioral Disorders Program, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School Singapore, Singapore ; Singapore Institute for Neurotechnology, National University of Singapore Singapore, Singapore.

ABSTRACT
Disgust modulates moral decisions involving harming others. We recently specified that this effect is bi-directionally modulated by individual sensitivity to disgust. Here, we show that this effect generalizes to the moral domain of honesty and extends to outcomes with real-world impact. We employed a dice-rolling task in which participants were incentivized to dishonestly report outcomes to increase their potential final monetary payoff. Disgust or control facial expressions were presented subliminally on each trial. Our results reveal that the disgust facial expressions altered honest reporting as a bi-directional function moderated by individual sensitivity. Combining these data with those from prior experiments revealed that the effect of disgust presentation on both harm judgments and honesty could be accounted for by the same bidirectional function, with no significant effect of domain. This clearly demonstrates that disgust facial expressions produce the same modulation of moral judgments across different moral foundations (harm and honesty). Our results suggest strong overlap in the cognitive/neural processes of moral judgments across moral foundations, and provide a framework for further studies to specify the integration of emotional information in moral decision making.

No MeSH data available.


Frequency distribution of reported rolls. (A) by individual number and (B) combining across paired-opposite numbers. The expected frequency of rolls by chance is plotted on the left of each graph.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4508507&req=5

Figure 2: Frequency distribution of reported rolls. (A) by individual number and (B) combining across paired-opposite numbers. The expected frequency of rolls by chance is plotted on the left of each graph.

Mentions: We first tested for evidence of dishonesty across our entire sample of participants, by examining whether the observed proportions of reported rolls of each number (1–6) concurred with the expected proportion for each number across all trials (16.7%) (Figure 2A). This revealed a highly significant deviation from the expected uniform proportions (X2 = 87.08, df = 5, p < 10−37; Cramer's V = 0.21), indicating an extremely high likelihood that some subjects were not honestly reporting the outcomes of their die rolls (percentages: 1 = 10.2%, 2 = 12.5%, 3 = 13.3%, 4 = 20.5%, 5 = 22.9%, 6 = 20.8%).


Modulation of incentivized dishonesty by disgust facial expressions.

Lim J, Ho PM, Mullette-Gillman OA - Front Neurosci (2015)

Frequency distribution of reported rolls. (A) by individual number and (B) combining across paired-opposite numbers. The expected frequency of rolls by chance is plotted on the left of each graph.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4508507&req=5

Figure 2: Frequency distribution of reported rolls. (A) by individual number and (B) combining across paired-opposite numbers. The expected frequency of rolls by chance is plotted on the left of each graph.
Mentions: We first tested for evidence of dishonesty across our entire sample of participants, by examining whether the observed proportions of reported rolls of each number (1–6) concurred with the expected proportion for each number across all trials (16.7%) (Figure 2A). This revealed a highly significant deviation from the expected uniform proportions (X2 = 87.08, df = 5, p < 10−37; Cramer's V = 0.21), indicating an extremely high likelihood that some subjects were not honestly reporting the outcomes of their die rolls (percentages: 1 = 10.2%, 2 = 12.5%, 3 = 13.3%, 4 = 20.5%, 5 = 22.9%, 6 = 20.8%).

Bottom Line: Combining these data with those from prior experiments revealed that the effect of disgust presentation on both harm judgments and honesty could be accounted for by the same bidirectional function, with no significant effect of domain.This clearly demonstrates that disgust facial expressions produce the same modulation of moral judgments across different moral foundations (harm and honesty).Our results suggest strong overlap in the cognitive/neural processes of moral judgments across moral foundations, and provide a framework for further studies to specify the integration of emotional information in moral decision making.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Neuroscience and Behavioral Disorders Program, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School Singapore, Singapore ; Singapore Institute for Neurotechnology, National University of Singapore Singapore, Singapore.

ABSTRACT
Disgust modulates moral decisions involving harming others. We recently specified that this effect is bi-directionally modulated by individual sensitivity to disgust. Here, we show that this effect generalizes to the moral domain of honesty and extends to outcomes with real-world impact. We employed a dice-rolling task in which participants were incentivized to dishonestly report outcomes to increase their potential final monetary payoff. Disgust or control facial expressions were presented subliminally on each trial. Our results reveal that the disgust facial expressions altered honest reporting as a bi-directional function moderated by individual sensitivity. Combining these data with those from prior experiments revealed that the effect of disgust presentation on both harm judgments and honesty could be accounted for by the same bidirectional function, with no significant effect of domain. This clearly demonstrates that disgust facial expressions produce the same modulation of moral judgments across different moral foundations (harm and honesty). Our results suggest strong overlap in the cognitive/neural processes of moral judgments across moral foundations, and provide a framework for further studies to specify the integration of emotional information in moral decision making.

No MeSH data available.