Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment.

Joshua D Greene1, Sylvia A Morelli, Kelly Lowenberg

  • 1Department of Psychology, Harvard University, 33 Kirkland St., Cambridge, MA 02138, United States. jdgreene@wjh.harvard.edu

Cognition
|December 26, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Cerebellar aging is spatially heterogeneous and supports cognitive resilience in later life.

Nature neuroscience·2026
Same author

A Multiple-Well Framework for Human Perceptual Decision-Making.

Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

AI-Enhanced Semantic Feature Norms for 786 Concepts.

Topics in cognitive science·2025
Same author

Learning expectations shape cognitive control allocation.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2025
Same author

Test-retest reliability of the human connectome: An OPM-MEG study.

Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)·2025
Same author

A Group Theoretic Analysis of the Symmetries Underlying Base Addition and Their Learnability by Neural Networks.

ArXiv·2025
Same journal

Identifying distinct sources of whole number interference in children's decimal comparison: the role of numerical magnitude and inhibitory control.

Cognition·2026
Same journal

Evidence for abstract spatial concept learning in young animals.

Cognition·2026
Same journal

Blurred lines or clear boundaries? Synchrony and social dominance shape domain-specific self-other processing.

Cognition·2026
Same journal

Knowability predicts curiosity and learning.

Cognition·2026
Same journal

Throwing good effort after bad: Evidence for a sunk-cost effect in cognitive effort-based decision-making.

Cognition·2026
Same journal

Cross-linguistic differences in incremental planning under uncertainty.

Cognition·2026
See all related articles

This study reveals that utilitarian moral judgments, which involve approving harmful actions for greater good, rely on controlled cognitive processes. Cognitive load selectively impairs these judgments, supporting a dual-process theory of moral decision-making.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Moral Psychology
  • Neuroscience

Background:

  • Traditional moral development theories focus on controlled cognition.
  • Recent trends highlight intuitive and emotional processes in moral judgment.
  • A dual-process theory synthesizes these perspectives.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To test a dual-process theory of moral judgment.
  • To associate utilitarian moral judgment with controlled cognition.
  • To link non-utilitarian moral judgment with automatic emotional responses.

Main Methods:

  • Utilizing a dual-process theory framework.
  • Implementing a cognitive load manipulation.
  • Analyzing interference effects on moral judgment.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Cognitive load selectively interfered with utilitarian judgment.
  • Evidence supports the role of controlled cognitive processes.
  • Utilitarian moral judgment is specifically influenced by cognitive control.

Conclusions:

  • Controlled cognitive processes are integral to moral judgment.
  • Utilitarian moral judgments are particularly dependent on controlled cognition.
  • Findings support a synthesized dual-process model of moral decision-making.