桥还是不桥:可卡因使用障碍的道德判断,一项关于人类道德的病例对照研究。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Social Neuroscience Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-18 DOI:10.1080/17470919.2023.2242096
A Mosca, A Miuli, G Mancusi, S Chiappini, G Stigliano, A De Pasquale, G Di Petta, G Bubbico, A Pasino, M Pettorruso, G Martinotti
{"title":"桥还是不桥:可卡因使用障碍的道德判断,一项关于人类道德的病例对照研究。","authors":"A Mosca, A Miuli, G Mancusi, S Chiappini, G Stigliano, A De Pasquale, G Di Petta, G Bubbico, A Pasino, M Pettorruso, G Martinotti","doi":"10.1080/17470919.2023.2242096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the \"Dual-Process theory\", morality is characterized by the interaction between an automatic-emotional process, mediated by the Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC) and linked to personal-deontological decisions, and a rational-conscious one, mediated by the Dorso-Lateral Prefrontal Cortex (DLPFC) and linked to impersonal-utilitarian decisions. These areas are altered by chronic use of cocaine, with a possible impact on moral decision-making.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the difference between a group of Cocaine Use Disorder (CUD) patients and a control group in moral decision-making.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Subjects with CUD were compared to an equal-sized healthy group regarding their moral decision-making. Trolley and Footbridge Moral Dilemmas were administered to each group. The quality of the answer (yes or no) and the time needed to answer were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The recruited group includes 72 subjects, 36 with CUD and 36 healthy subjects (average age of 39.51 ± 9.89). In the Trolley dilemma, almost all the subjects (97.3%) answered \"yes\", while in the Footbridge dilemma CUD subjects answered \"yes\" more often (52.7%) than the healthy group (19.4%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For strong emotional dilemmas (Footbridge), cocaine users answered \"yes\" with a higher frequency compared to healthy subjects, highlighting a wider utilitarian tendency in decision-making and a poor emotional participation.</p>","PeriodicalId":49511,"journal":{"name":"Social Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":"271-281"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"To bridge or not to bridge: Moral Judgement in Cocaine Use Disorders, a case-control study on human morality.\",\"authors\":\"A Mosca, A Miuli, G Mancusi, S Chiappini, G Stigliano, A De Pasquale, G Di Petta, G Bubbico, A Pasino, M Pettorruso, G Martinotti\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17470919.2023.2242096\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the \\\"Dual-Process theory\\\", morality is characterized by the interaction between an automatic-emotional process, mediated by the Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC) and linked to personal-deontological decisions, and a rational-conscious one, mediated by the Dorso-Lateral Prefrontal Cortex (DLPFC) and linked to impersonal-utilitarian decisions. These areas are altered by chronic use of cocaine, with a possible impact on moral decision-making.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the difference between a group of Cocaine Use Disorder (CUD) patients and a control group in moral decision-making.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Subjects with CUD were compared to an equal-sized healthy group regarding their moral decision-making. Trolley and Footbridge Moral Dilemmas were administered to each group. The quality of the answer (yes or no) and the time needed to answer were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The recruited group includes 72 subjects, 36 with CUD and 36 healthy subjects (average age of 39.51 ± 9.89). In the Trolley dilemma, almost all the subjects (97.3%) answered \\\"yes\\\", while in the Footbridge dilemma CUD subjects answered \\\"yes\\\" more often (52.7%) than the healthy group (19.4%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For strong emotional dilemmas (Footbridge), cocaine users answered \\\"yes\\\" with a higher frequency compared to healthy subjects, highlighting a wider utilitarian tendency in decision-making and a poor emotional participation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"271-281\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2023.2242096\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2023.2242096","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在“双过程理论”中,道德的特点是由前扣带皮层(ACC)介导的与个人义务决策相关的自动情绪过程和由背外侧前额叶皮层(DLPFC)介导的与个人功利决策相关的理性意识过程之间的相互作用。这些区域因长期使用可卡因而改变,可能对道德决策产生影响。目的:评价可卡因使用障碍(CUD)患者与对照组在道德决策方面的差异。方法:将患有CUD的受试者与同等规模的健康组进行道德决策比较。每组分别进行电车和行人桥道德困境。记录回答的质量(是或否)和回答所需的时间。结果:纳入组72例,其中CUD患者36例,健康者36例,平均年龄39.51±9.89岁。在电车困境中,几乎所有被试(97.3%)回答“是”,而在行人桥困境中,CUD被试回答“是”的频率(52.7%)高于健康组(19.4%)。结论:对于强烈的情绪困境(Footbridge),可卡因使用者回答“是”的频率比健康受试者高,这表明他们在决策中有更广泛的功利倾向,情感参与能力较差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
To bridge or not to bridge: Moral Judgement in Cocaine Use Disorders, a case-control study on human morality.

Background: In the "Dual-Process theory", morality is characterized by the interaction between an automatic-emotional process, mediated by the Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC) and linked to personal-deontological decisions, and a rational-conscious one, mediated by the Dorso-Lateral Prefrontal Cortex (DLPFC) and linked to impersonal-utilitarian decisions. These areas are altered by chronic use of cocaine, with a possible impact on moral decision-making.

Objective: To evaluate the difference between a group of Cocaine Use Disorder (CUD) patients and a control group in moral decision-making.

Methods: Subjects with CUD were compared to an equal-sized healthy group regarding their moral decision-making. Trolley and Footbridge Moral Dilemmas were administered to each group. The quality of the answer (yes or no) and the time needed to answer were recorded.

Results: The recruited group includes 72 subjects, 36 with CUD and 36 healthy subjects (average age of 39.51 ± 9.89). In the Trolley dilemma, almost all the subjects (97.3%) answered "yes", while in the Footbridge dilemma CUD subjects answered "yes" more often (52.7%) than the healthy group (19.4%).

Conclusion: For strong emotional dilemmas (Footbridge), cocaine users answered "yes" with a higher frequency compared to healthy subjects, highlighting a wider utilitarian tendency in decision-making and a poor emotional participation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Neuroscience
Social Neuroscience 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Neuroscience features original empirical Research Papers as well as targeted Reviews, Commentaries and Fast Track Brief Reports that examine how the brain mediates social behavior, social cognition, social interactions and relationships, group social dynamics, and related topics that deal with social/interpersonal psychology and neurobiology. Multi-paper symposia and special topic issues are organized and presented regularly as well. The goal of Social Neuroscience is to provide a place to publish empirical articles that intend to further our understanding of the neural mechanisms contributing to the development and maintenance of social behaviors, or to understanding how these mechanisms are disrupted in clinical disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信