PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Previous neuroscientific research has expounded on the fundamental role played by emotion during moral decision-making. Negative emotionality has been observed to exert a general inhibitory effect towards harmful behaviors against others. Nevertheless, the downregulation of negative affects at different levels of moral processing (e.g. impersonal versus personal moral dilemmas) alongside its possible interactions with other factors (e.g. perspective taking) hasn\'t been directly assessed; both of which can assist in predicting future moral decision-making. In the present research, we empirically test (Study 1, N = 41) whether downregulating negative emotionality through pharmacological interventions using lorazepam (a GABA receptor agonist), modulate the permissibility of harm to others -i.e. if participants find it more morally permissible to harm others when harm is unavoidable (inevitable harm moral dilemmas), than when it may be avoided (evitable harm moral dilemmas). Furthermore, using another sample (Study 2, N = 31), we assess whether lorazepam\'s effect is modulated by different perspective-taking conditions during a moral dilemma task -e.g. \"is it morally permissible for you to […]?\" (1st person perspective), relative to \"is it morally permissible for [x individual] to […]?\" (3rd person perspective)-, where the outcome of the different scenarios is controlled. The results of both studies converge, revealing an emotion-dependent, rather than an outcome-dependent, pharmacological modulation. Lorazepam only influenced interpersonal moral judgments when not modulated by the evitable/inevitable condition. Furthermore, there was a significant interaction between perspective-taking and drug administration, as lorazepam exerted a larger effect in modulating moral choices rather than moral judgements.
摘要：
先前的神经科学研究已经阐明了情感在道德决策中的基本作用。已观察到负面情绪对他人的有害行为具有普遍的抑制作用。然而，在道德过程的不同层面（例如非个人道德困境和个人道德困境）的负面影响以及其与其他因素（例如观点）的可能相互作用尚未得到直接评估；两者都可以帮助预测未来的道德决策。在目前的研究中,我们实证检验（研究1，N=41）是否通过使用劳拉西泮（GABA受体激动剂）的药物干预来下调负面情绪，调节对他人的伤害的可容许性-即，如果参与者发现在不可避免的伤害（不可避免的伤害道德困境）时，在道德上更允许伤害他人，而不是什么时候可以避免(不可避免的伤害道德困境)。此外，使用另一个样本(研究2，N=31)，我们评估劳拉西泮的效果是否在道德困境任务中受到不同视角的调节-例如“你在道德上允许[...]吗？”（第一人称视角），相对于“[x个人]在道德上允许[...]吗？”（第三人称视角）-，控制不同场景的结果。两项研究的结果趋同，揭示了一种情感依赖，而不是依赖结果，药理学调制。如果不受可能/不可避免的条件的调节，劳拉西泮只会影响人际道德判断。此外，透视和药物管理之间存在显著的相互作用，因为劳拉西泮在调节道德选择而不是道德判断方面发挥了更大的作用。
