Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The Dual-Process Theory of Moral Judgments: A Way of Explaining Why VMPFC Patients Make More Utilitarian Judgments in Relation to Harmful Situations
University of Skövde, School of Bioscience.
2014 (English)Independent thesis Basic level (university diploma), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

According to Joshua Greene’s dual-process theory, our moral judgments are processed in one of two systems in the brain referred to as the emotional (quick, unconscious) and rational (slow, conscious) system. The reason for why people tend to answer differently in the footbridge dilemma compared to the trolley dilemma is because the emotional system is dominating over the rational system. Research has demonstrated that patients with ventromedial prefrontal cortex damage make more utilitarian judgments in moral dilemmas in relation to harmful situations. According to the dual-process theory, this is because the emotional system has been impaired which results in that the only working system is the rational system. The aim of this thesis is to investigate how the dual-process theory tries to explain why our moral judgments tend to differ in some moral dilemmas. This thesis will also look at how the dual-process theory tries to explain why patients with ventromedial prefrontal cortex damage make utilitarian judgments in relation to harmful situations. This thesis will sustain that the dual-process theory have gained strong empirical support, especially from the research that has been made on patients with ventromedial prefrontal cortex damage. This thesis will also argue that some modifications needs to be made on the dual-process theory in order to make it stronger. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2014. , 50 p.
Keyword [en]
VMPFC, Moral Judgments, Dual-process theory, Trolley dilemma, Footbridge dilemma
National Category
Humanities Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:his:diva-9423OAI: oai:DiVA.org:his-9423DiVA: diva2:723954
Subject / course
Cognitive Neuroscience
Educational program
Consciousness Studies - Philosophy and Neuropsychology
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2014-09-01 Created: 2014-06-11 Last updated: 2014-09-01Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(728 kB)507 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 728 kBChecksum SHA-512
af275d12c445220aa83298efb4e7601e50f1f3dcb5ddc1d5fa064c7a3053cefd450b28086a8d816e2755d07e2156228b40fed08becdd2fae932c1ff5468d365d
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
School of Bioscience
HumanitiesPsychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 507 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 351 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf