Transcript Research poster presentation

Joshua Hansen, Brenna Smith, and Crystal Kreitler
Department of Psychology, Angelo State University, San Angelo, TX, 76904
RESULTS
RESULTS
INTRODUCTION
• Considerable evidence suggests that moral judgment is
conditioned through two separate systems: a
deontological system that is affect based, and a
utilitarian system which is reason based.
• The current study focused on logical priming and its
possible effect on moral judgments. The experimental
design was influenced by Dr. Joshua Greene’s ‘DualProcess Theory of Moral Judgment’.
Figure 1. Participants scored low in utilizing
utilitarian decision making in both conditions. *p=NS
Figure 5. Participants scored low in utilizing
utilitarian decision making in both conditions. *p=NS
Figure 2.
Participants scored low in utilizing
utilitarian decision making in both conditions. *p=NS
Figure 6. Participants scored low in utilizing
utilitarian decision making in both conditions. *p=NS
• The objective of the current study was to examine
whether logical priming leads participants to a higher
prevalence of utilitarian moral judgments. If the ‘DualProcess Theory of Moral Judgment holds true it could
have far-reaching implications concerning ethical
evaluations made in the process of scientific research.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
METHODS
• Peripheral LPS administration impairs
• Fifty-seven undergraduate students (38 females) from
psychology classes at ASU participated.
• Participants were randomly assigned to two conditions
(Logical priming vs. Control Group). All participants
completed a standard consent form, followed by a
demographics form. Participants in the logical priming
condition were asked to work on a series of logic problems
which require deductive reasoning. Participants in the
control group were given a neutral task. Both conditions
were then asked to answer a short series of ethical
vignettes to determine if their responses would be more
utilitarian or deontological in character.
• Following these tasks, all participants were asked to
complete a state anxiety questionnaire to determine if their
was any perceptible difference amongst the two
conditions.
As hypothesized
observed
in some
of ourGroup)
• A• one-way
(Logicaland
Priming
Group
vs. Control
previous was
work,
significant
learningA
MANOVA
conducted
onLPS-induced
all ethical vignettes.
decrements
were noted,
including
fewer for
avoidance
marginal
significant
univariate
main effect
group was
responses
and decreased
response
efficiency.
obtained
for utilitarian
decision
making
in the kidney
• As hypothesized,
antalarmin
proved
to be
effective in
vignette
(See Figure 8).
Participants
in the
Logical
attenuating
behavioral
effects
of LPS, to
as select
shownain
Priming
Groupthe
reported
a greater
likelihood
avoidances,
escapes,than
andthose
response
efficiency.
more
logical response
in the
Control Group.
• Treatment
with antalarmin
no found.
effect on any
There
were no other
significantalone
main had
effects
of the behavioral, tissue, or serum measures.
Behavioral
effects MANOVA
were not due
to conducted
alterations on
in all
• A• one-way
(Gender)
was
motor
ability, as
shown byunivariate
crossing latencies,
andforin
ethical
vignettes.
significant
main effect
later was
testing
days when
LPS-treated
mice making
cross more
gender
obtained
for utilitarian
decision
in
than control
animals.
thefrequently
lifeboat vignette
(See Figure
3). Males reported a
• Contrarygreater
to our original
hypothesis,
did
significantly
likelihood
to select aantalarmin
more logical
not affect
cytokine
However,
response
thanperipheral
did females.
Thereproduction.
were no other
antalarmin
significantly
reduced central (i.e.,
significant
main
effects found.
hippocampal) levels of IL-1, potentially explaining
the observed learning decrements.
REFERENCES
Figure 8. Participants scored high in utilizing utilitarian
decision making amongst the male gender*p<.05
Figure 7. Participants scored low in utilizing
utilitarian decision making in both conditions. *p=NS
• It was hypothesized that participants primed with a
two-way
avoidance
conditioning.
series
of logicalactive
problems
would exhibit
a higher
•
These
cognitive
effects
induced
bywith
LPSa
tendency to approach troubling ethical vignettes
cost/benefit
analysis as opposed
to affect-driven
can be ameliorated
by antalarmin,
a moral
evaluations.
selective CRF receptor antagonist.
• The
effects
of antalarmin
•The
findings
demonstrated
that thereon
wasLPS-induced
a marginal
cognitive
deficit
do
not
appear
to be
difference between conditions towards moral
evaluations
for via
the low-risk
vignette. Additional
mediated
effectskidney
on corticosterone
findings
indicated a significant difference between
production.
males and females regarding the low-risk Lifeboat
• The effects of antalarmin on LPS-induced
vignette.
learning decrements appears to be due to a
Figure 4.
Participants scored low in utilizing
utilitarian decision making in both conditions. *p=NS
Figure 3.
Participants scored high in utilizing
utilitarian decision making in condition two. *p<.05
•These
data suggest
thatproduction
logic has a marginal
effect on
reduction
in the
of hippocampal
moral evaluations of a certain character. Furthermore,
(but not peripheral) IL-1.
data demonstrates that there is an observable difference
in moral evaluations between genders.