Professional Documents
Culture Documents
www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0914826107
Experiment 1 used an ofine TMS paradigm in which participants received TMS at 1 Hz for 25 min and then read and
responded to a series of moral scenarios (Fig. 2, Upper). Experiment 2 provided a replication and extension of experiment 1 in a
different group of participants. Specically, to minimize the possibility that the effect of ofine TMS might spread, over time, to
regions beyond the target RTPJ, experiment 2 used an online
paradigm in which participants received short bursts of TMS at
10 Hz for 500 ms, the onset of which was concurrent with the moral
judgment for each scenario (Fig. 2, Lower). We predicted that in
both experiments, TMS to the RTPJ would reduce the role of
beliefs and, as a direct result, increase the role of outcomes in
participants moral judgments relative to (a) judgments made by
the same participants following TMS to the control region and
(b) judgments made by other participants who received no TMS at
all (Fig. S1). Conrming this prediction would provide clear evidence for the causal role of the RTPJ in belief attribution and
the essential role of belief attribution in moral judgment.
Results
Experiment 1. To analyze the effect of TMS site on participants
Author contributions: L.Y., J.A.C., M.H., A.P.-L., and R.S. designed research; L.Y. and J.A.C.
performed research; L.Y. and R.S. analyzed data; and L.Y., J.A.C., M.H., A.P.-L., and R.S.
wrote the paper.
The authors declare no conict of interest.
*This Direct Submission article had a prearranged editor.
1
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND
COGNITIVE SCIENCES
Edited* by Nancy G. Kanwisher, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, and approved February 22, 2010 (received for review December
21, 2009)
Fig. 2. Design for experiment 1 (Upper) and experiment 2 (Lower). Experiment 1 used an ofine TMS paradigm in which participants received TMS at
1 Hz for 25 min and then read and responded to a series of moral scenarios. The
order of TMS sessions, RTPJ rst vs. control rst, was counterbalanced across
participants. Experiment 2 used an online TMS paradigm in which participants
received TMS at 10 Hz for 500 ms. TMS onset was concurrent with onset of the
moral judgment question for each story.
6754 | www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0914826107
Discussion
Transiently disrupting RTPJ activity with ofine and online
repetitive TMS reduced the inuence of beliefs on moral judgments. Normal moral judgment often represents a response to a
constellation of features, including not only the agents beliefs but
the agents desires (15), the magnitude of the consequences (16,
17), the agents prior record (18), the means used by the agent
to cause the harm (17, 19), the external constraints on the agent
(e.g., coercion, self-defense) (20), and so on (21). In the current
experiments, we manipulated two of these factors, the agents
belief and the outcome of the action, and found that the effect of
TMS to the RTPJ was specic to the agents belief. We found an
interaction between TMS site (RTPJ vs. control) and belief (i.e.,
whether the agent believed he or she would cause harm) in parYoung et al.
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND
COGNITIVE SCIENCES
shorter the interval between TMS and behavioral testing, the less
likely it is for effects on distant regions to be responsible for
changes in moral judgments (14). In addition, this experiment
allowed us to assess the robustness of our initial ndings, using a
different TMS paradigm, in a different group of participants.
Young et al.
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND
COGNITIVE SCIENCES
1. Baird JA, Astington JW (2004) The role of mental state understanding in the
development of moral cognition and moral action. New Dir Child Adolesc Dev 103:
3749.
2. Karniol R (1978) Childrens use of intention cues in evaluating behavior. Psychol Bull
85:7685.
3. Piaget J (1932) The Moral Judgment of the Child (Free Press, New York).
4. Gallagher HL, Frith CD (2003) Functional imaging of theory of mind. Trends Cogn Sci
7:7783.
5. Gobbini MI, Koralek AC, Bryan RE, Montgomery KJ, Haxby JV (2007) Two takes on the
social brain: A comparison of theory of mind tasks. J Cognit Neurosci 19:18031814.
6. Perner J, Aichhorn M, Kronbichler M, Staffen W, Ladurner G (2006) Thinking of
mental and other representations: The roles of left and right temporo-parietal
junction. Social Neuroscience 1:245258.
7. Saxe R, Kanwisher N (2003) People thinking about thinking people. The role of the
temporo-parietal junction in theory of mind. NeuroImage 19:18351842.
8. Saxe R, Powell L (2006) Its the thought that counts: Specic brain regions for one
component of Theory of Mind. Psychol Sci 17:692699.
9. Young L, Cushman F, Hauser M, Saxe R (2007) The neural basis of the interaction
between theory of mind and moral judgment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:82358240.
10. Young L, Saxe R (2008) The neural basis of belief encoding and integration in moral
judgment. NeuroImage 40:19121920.
11. Valero-Cabre A, Payne BR, Pascual-Leone A (2007) Opposite impact on 14C-2deoxyglucose brain metabolism following patterns of high and low frequency
repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the posterior parietal cortex. Exp Brain
Res 176:603615.
12. Valero-Cabre A, Payne B, Rushmore J, Lomber S, Pascual-Leone A (2005) Impact of
repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the parietal cortex on metabolic brain
activity: A 14C-2DG tracing study in the cat. Exp Brain Res 163:112.
13. Greicius MD, Krasnow B, Reiss AL, Menon V (2003) Functional connectivity in the
resting brain: A network analysis of the default mode hypothesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci
USA 100:253258.
14. Walsh V, Cowey A (2000) Transcranial magnetic stimulation and cognitive neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci 1:7379.
15. Cushman F (2008) Crime and punishment: Distinguishing the roles of causal and
intentional analysis in moral judgment. Cognition 108:353380.
16. Greene JD, Sommerville RB, Nystrom LE, Darley JM, Cohen JD (2001) An fMRI
investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science 293:21052108.
17. Cushman F, Young L, Hauser MD (2006) The role of conscious reasoning and intuitions
in moral judgment: Testing three principles of harm. Psychol Sci 17:10821089.
18. Kliemann D, Young L, Scholz J, Saxe R (2008) The inuence of prior record on moral
judgment. Neuropsychologia 46:29492957.
19. Greene JD, Nystrom LE, Engell AD, Darley JM, Cohen JD (2004) The neural bases of
cognitive conict and control in moral judgment. Neuron 44:389400.
20. Woolfolk RL, Doris JM, Darley JM (2006) Identication, situational constraint, and
social cognition: Studies in the attribution of moral responsibility. Cognition 100:
283301.
21. Young L, Nichols S, Saxe R Investigating the neural and cognitive basis of moral luck:
Its not what you do but what you know. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, in
press.
22. Robertson EM, Theoret H, Pascual-Leone A (2003) Studies in cognition: The problems
solved and created by transcranial magnetic stimulation. J Cognit Neurosci 15:
948960.
23. Wagner T, Valero-Cabre A, Pascual-Leone A (2007) Noninvasive human brain
stimulation. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 9:527565.
24. Young L, Saxe R (2009) Innocent intentions: A correlation between forgiveness for
accidental harm and neural activity. Neuropsychologia 47:20652072.
25. Young L, Saxe R (2009) An FMRI investigation of spontaneous mental state inference
for moral judgment. J Cognit Neurosci 21:13961405.
26. Valero-Cabre A, Rushmore RJ, Payne BR (2006) Low frequency transcranial magnetic
stimulation on the posterior parietal cortex induces visuotopically specic neglect-like
syndrome. Exp Brain Res 172:1421.
27. Wagner T, et al. (2007) Transcranial direct current stimulation: A computer-based
human model study. NeuroImage 35:11131124.
6758 | www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0914826107
28. Apperly IA, Samson D, Chiavarino C, Humphreys GW (2004) Frontal and temporoparietal lobe contributions to theory of mind: Neuropsychological evidence from a
false-belief task with reduced language and executive demands. J Cognit Neurosci 16:
17731784.
29. Adolphs R (2009) The social brain: Neural basis of social knowledge. Annu Rev Psychol
60:693716.
30. Bechara A (2002) The neurology of social cognition. Brain 125:16731675.
31. Ciaramelli E, Muccioli M, Ladavas E, di Pellegrino G (2007) Selective decit in personal
moral judgment following damage to ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Social
Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 2:8492.
32. Koenigs M, et al. (2007) Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral
judgments. Nature 446:908911.
33. Mendez MF, Anderson E, Shapira JS (2005) An investigation of moral judgment in
frontotemporal dementia. Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology 18:193197.
34. Young L, Cushman FA, Adolphs R, Tranel D, Hauser MD (2006) Does emotion mediate
the relationship between an actions moral status and its intentional status?
Neuropsychological evidence. Journal of Cognition and Culture 6:291304.
35. Knoch D, Pascual-Leone A, Meyer K, Treyer V, Fehr E (2006) Diminishing reciprocal
fairness by disrupting the right prefrontal cortex. Science 314:829832.
36. Priori A, et al. (2008) Lie-specic involvement of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in
deception. Cereb Cortex 18:451455.
37. Corbetta M, Kincade JM, Ollinger JM, McAvoy MP, Shulman GL (2000) Voluntary
orienting is dissociated from target detection in human posterior parietal cortex. Nat
Neurosci 3:292297.
38. Mitchell JP (2007) Activity in right temporo-parietal junction is not selective for
theory-of-mind. Cereb Cortex 18:262271.
39. Scholz J, Triantafyllou C, Whiteld-Gabrieli S, Brown EN, Saxe R (2009) Distinct
regions of right temporo-parietal junction are selective for theory of mind and
exogenous attention. PLoS One 4:17.
40. Decety J, Lamm C (2007) The role of the right temporoparietal junction in social
interaction: How low-level computational processes contribute to meta-cognition.
Neuroscientist 13:580593.
41. Kammer T (1999) Phosphenes and transient scotomas induced by magnetic
stimulation of the occipital lobe: Their topographic relationship. Neuropsychologia
37:191198.
42. Gogtay N, et al. (2008) Three-dimensional brain growth abnormalities in childhoodonset schizophrenia visualized by using tensor-based morphometry. Proc Natl Acad
Sci USA 105:1597915984.
43. Blakemore SJ (2008) The social brain in adolescence. Nat Rev Neurosci 9:267277.
44. Saxe RR, Whiteld-Gabrieli S, Scholz J, Pelphrey KA (2009) Brain regions for
perceiving and reasoning about other people in school-aged children. Child Dev 80:
11971209.
45. Leslie AM, Mallon R, DiCorcia JA (2006) Transgressors, victims, and crybabies: Is basic
moral judgment spared in autism? Social Neuroscience 1:270283.
46. Blair RJ (1996) Brief report: Morality in the autistic child. J Autism Dev Disord 26:
571579.
47. Baron-Cohen S, Leslie AM, Frith U (1985) Does the autistic child have a theory of
mind? Cognition 21:3746.
48. Senju A, Southgate V, White S, Frith U (2009) Mindblind eyes: An absence of
spontaneous theory of mind in Asperger syndrome. Science 325:883885.
49. Kana RK, Keller TA, Cherkassky VL, Minshew NJ, Just MA (2009) Atypical frontalposterior synchronization of Theory of Mind regions in autism during mental state
attribution. Soc Neurosci 4:135152.
50. Mikhail JM (2007) Universal moral grammar: Theory, evidence and the future. Trends
Cogn Sci 11:143152.
51. Chen R, et al. (1997) Safety of different inter-train intervals for repetitive transcranial
magnetic stimulation and recommendations for safe ranges of stimulation
parameters. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 105:415421.
52. Maeda F, Keenan JP, Tormos JM, Topka H, Pascual-Leone A (2000) Interindividual
variability of the modulatory effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation
on cortical excitability. Exp Brain Res 133:425430.
53. Gugino LD, et al. (2001) Transcranial magnetic stimulation coregistered with MRI: A
comparison of a guided versus blind stimulation technique and its effect on evoked
compound muscle action potentials. Clin Neurophysiol 112:17811792.
Young et al.