Display options
Cite
Blakey R, Askelund AD, Boccanera M, et al. No Differential Effects of Neural and Psychological Explanations of Psychopathy on Moral Behavior. Front Psychol. 2018;9:1317doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01317.
Blakey, R., Askelund, A. D., Boccanera, M., Immonen, J., Plohl, N., Popham, C., Sorger, C., & Stuhlreyer, J. (2018). No Differential Effects of Neural and Psychological Explanations of Psychopathy on Moral Behavior. Frontiers in psychology, 91317. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01317
Blakey, Robert, et al. "No Differential Effects of Neural and Psychological Explanations of Psychopathy on Moral Behavior." Frontiers in psychology vol. 9 (2018): 1317. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01317
Blakey R, Askelund AD, Boccanera M, Immonen J, Plohl N, Popham C, Sorger C, Stuhlreyer J. No Differential Effects of Neural and Psychological Explanations of Psychopathy on Moral Behavior. Front Psychol. 2018 Jul 31;9:1317. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01317. eCollection 2018. PMID: 30108538; PMCID: PMC6079205.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Front Psychol. 2018 Jul 31;9:1317. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01317. eCollection 2018.

No Differential Effects of Neural and Psychological Explanations of Psychopathy on Moral Behavior.

Frontiers in psychology

Robert Blakey, Adrian Dahl Askelund, Matilde Boccanera, Johanna Immonen, Nejc Plohl, Cassandra Popham, Clarissa Sorger, Julia Stuhlreyer

Affiliations

  1. Centre for Criminology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
  2. Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
  3. Department of Psychology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
  4. Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
  5. Department of Psychology, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia.
  6. Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
  7. Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  8. Center for Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

PMID: 30108538 PMCID: PMC6079205 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01317

Abstract

Research in neurocriminology has explored the link between neural functions and structures and the psychopathic disposition. This online experiment aimed to assess the effect of communicating the neuroscience of psychopathy on the degree to which lay people exhibited attitudes characteristic of psychopathy in particular in terms of moral behavior. If psychopathy is blamed on the brain, people may feel less morally responsible for their own psychopathic tendencies. In the study, participants read false feedback about their own psychopathic traits supposedly inferred from their Facebook likes, described either in neurobiological or cognitive terms. Participants were randomly allocated to read that they either had above-average or below-average psychopathic traits. We found no support for the hypothesis that the neuroscientific explanation of psychopathy influences moral behavior. This casts doubt on the fear that communicating the neuroscience of psychopathy will promote psychopathic attitudes.

Keywords: attitude change; belief in free will; neurocriminology; psychopathy; science communication

References

  1. Cognition. 2011 Oct;121(1):154-61 - PubMed
  2. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2015 Apr;41(4):540-58 - PubMed
  3. Psychol Sci. 2011 May;22(5):613-8 - PubMed
  4. Front Psychol. 2013 Sep 23;4:614 - PubMed
  5. Cognition. 2008 Jun;107(3):1144-54 - PubMed
  6. Cognition. 2012 Jun;123(3):434-41 - PubMed
  7. Front Psychol. 2017 Mar 14;8:294 - PubMed
  8. Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Apr;23(2):640-7 - PubMed
  9. J Cogn Neurosci. 2008 Mar;20(3):470-7 - PubMed
  10. Cognition. 2006 Sep;101(2):414-42 - PubMed
  11. Conscious Cogn. 2014 Apr;25:27-41 - PubMed
  12. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2012 Aug;7(6):708-14 - PubMed
  13. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2008;4:217-46 - PubMed
  14. J Clin Psychol. 1979 Jan;35(1):60-7 - PubMed
  15. Cognition. 2016 Jun;151:6-9 - PubMed
  16. Psychol Sci. 2008 Jan;19(1):49-54 - PubMed
  17. Am Psychol. 2015 Sep;70(6):543-56 - PubMed
  18. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013 Feb;104(2):216-35 - PubMed
  19. Psychol Sci. 2012 Oct 1;23(10):1264-70 - PubMed
  20. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Apr 9;110(15):5802-5 - PubMed
  21. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2008 Jan;3(1):14-9 - PubMed
  22. PLoS One. 2013 Apr 04;8(4):e60418 - PubMed
  23. Conscious Cogn. 2012 Jun;21(2):915-27 - PubMed
  24. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2010 Mar;5(1):59-67 - PubMed
  25. Conscious Cogn. 2012 Sep;21(3):1482-90 - PubMed
  26. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2015 Feb;10(2):262-8 - PubMed
  27. Assessment. 2014 Feb;21(1):28-41 - PubMed
  28. Psychol Sci. 2014 Aug;25(8):1563-70 - PubMed
  29. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2018 Jun 6;:null - PubMed
  30. Psychol Bull. 2011 Sep;137(5):800-18 - PubMed
  31. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2012 Jul-Aug;35(4):289-97 - PubMed
  32. Science. 2012 Aug 17;337(6096):846-9 - PubMed
  33. Br J Soc Psychol. 2013 Jun;52(2):205-18 - PubMed
  34. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1972 Feb;21(2):204-18 - PubMed
  35. Front Psychol. 2014 Dec 17;5:1483 - PubMed
  36. Science. 2001 Sep 14;293(5537):2105-8 - PubMed
  37. Bioethics. 2014 Jun;28(5):225-34 - PubMed
  38. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2015 Feb;144(1):222-35 - PubMed
  39. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2009 Feb;35(2):260-8 - PubMed
  40. Science. 2015 Aug 28;349(6251):aac4716 - PubMed
  41. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2004 Nov 29;359(1451):1775-85 - PubMed

Publication Types