Harm to others outweighs harm to self in moral decision making

Crockett, Molly J.; Kurth‐Nelson, Zeb; Siegel, Jenifer Z.; Dayan, Peter; Dolan, Raymond J.

doi:10.1073/pnas.1408988111

Cited by 272 publications

(364 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

339

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An important aim of our study was to explain what might drive variability in prosocial learning (1,(20)(21)(22). We identify evidence of a mechanism linking variability in empathy to variability in prosocial behavior, with highly empathic individuals having an increased learning rate, and stronger sgACC PE signals, for other people's rewards.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neurocomputational mechanisms of prosocial learning and links to empathy

Lockwood

Apps

Valton

et al. 2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

186

236

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reinforcement learning theory powerfully characterizes how we learn to benefit ourselves. In this theory, prediction errors-the difference between a predicted and actual outcome of a choice-drive learning. However, we do not operate in a social vacuum. To behave prosocially we must learn the consequences of our actions for other people. Empathy, the ability to vicariously experience and understand the affect of others, is hypothesized to be a critical facilitator of prosocial behaviors, but the link between empathy and prosocial behavior is still unclear. During functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) participants chose between different stimuli that were probabilistically associated with rewards for themselves (self), another person (prosocial), or no one (control). Using computational modeling, we show that people can learn to obtain rewards for others but do so more slowly than when learning to obtain rewards for themselves. fMRI revealed that activity in a posterior portion of the subgenual anterior cingulate cortex/basal forebrain (sgACC) drives learning only when we are acting in a prosocial context and signals a prosocial prediction error conforming to classical principles of reinforcement learning theory. However, there is also substantial variability in the neural and behavioral efficiency of prosocial learning, which is predicted by trait empathy. More empathic people learn more quickly when benefitting others, and their sgACC response is the most selective for prosocial learning. We thus reveal a computational mechanism driving prosocial learning in humans. This framework could provide insights into atypical prosocial behavior in those with disorders of social cognition.reinforcement learning theory | prosocial behavior | empathy | reward | subgenual anterior cingulate cortex P rosocial behaviors, namely, social behaviors or actions intended to benefit others, are a fundamental but poorly understood aspect of social interaction (1). To behave prosocially, animals need to learn about the consequences that their actions can have for others. In reinforcement learning theory (RLT), prediction errors (PEs)-differences between expected and actual outcomesdrive learning (2). RLT provides a powerful framework for understanding how animals learn to obtain rewards for themselves (3). However, the processes by which animals learn to make choices that benefit others are unknown. Here we use RLT to characterize prosocial learning, combining functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and detailed computational modeling of behavior.Studies using economic games, moral judgments, or charity donation tasks have consistently reported activity in the ventral striatum, posterior regions of the subgenual cingulate cortex/basal forebrain (hereinafter referred to as sgACC), dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC), and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) during prosocial behavior (4-7). Each of these regions receives input from midbrain dopaminergic neurons (8), and these cortical regions all project to the ventral ...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Moreover, although humans have a remarkable inclination to engage in prosocial behaviors, there are also substantial individual differences (1,(20)(21)(22). Empathy, the capacity to vicariously experience and understand the affect of others (23)(24)(25)(26)(27), has been hypothesized to be a critical motivator of prosocial behaviors (25)(26)(27)(28).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Neurocomputational mechanisms of prosocial learning and links to empathy

Lockwood

Apps

Valton

et al. 2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

186

236

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By contrast, when allocating physical harm to themselves and others, seminal work by Crockett et al has shown that people are hyperaltruistic (3,4). Specifically, people are willing to forego more reward to reduce others' pain than to spare themselves from harm, suggesting that they value others' welfare more than their own (3). The tension between selfish and (hyper)altruistic views of human decision making calls into question whether the principles guiding moral decisions are the same when distributing rewards versus harms.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Economists typically characterize human decision makers as profoundly selfish when distributing rewards among themselves and others (1,2). By contrast, when allocating physical harm to themselves and others, seminal work by Crockett et al has shown that people are hyperaltruistic (3,4). Specifically, people are willing to forego more reward to reduce others' pain than to spare themselves from harm, suggesting that they value others' welfare more than their own (3).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Harm to self outweighs benefit to others in moral decision making

Volz

Welborn

Göbel

et al. 2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How we make decisions that have direct consequences for ourselves and others forms the moral foundation of our society. Whereas economic theory contends that humans aim at maximizing their own gains, recent seminal psychological work suggests that our behavior is instead hyperaltruistic: We are more willing to sacrifice gains to spare others from harm than to spare ourselves from harm. To investigate how such egoistic and hyperaltruistic tendencies influence moral decision making, we investigated trade-off decisions combining monetary rewards and painful electric shocks, administered to the participants themselves or an anonymous other. Whereas we replicated the notion of hyperaltruism (i.e., the willingness to forego reward to spare others from harm), we observed strongly egoistic tendencies in participants' unwillingness to harm themselves for others' benefit. The moral principle guiding intersubject trade-off decision making observed in our study is best described as egoistically biased altruism, with important implications for our understanding of economic and social interactions in our society. morality | decision making | altruism | egoism | social cognition

show abstract

“…These findings may indicate that the worst possible outcome carries more weight when deciding for others than for self, perhaps because choosing for others has potential moral consequences whereas choosing for oneself does not. This idea finds additional support in a recent study where participants chose whether to inflict painful electric shocks on either themselves or an anonymous other person in exchange for money (11). Strikingly, most people were more averse to inflicting pain on others than themselves.…”

mentioning

confidence: 81%