Decision making
How difficulty processing emotions affects moral choices
Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC
People with trait alexithymia are more willing to support harmful actions for the greater good because they feel less empathic concern for the victim.
How this study connects
Role on claims
Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.
Deontological aversion to causing harm is heavily driven by emotional processing, such as empathic concern and brain activity in regions like the subgenual cingulate cortex, rather than purely cognitive calculation.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Individual differences in emotional processing, specifically reduced empathic concern, are associated with a greater likelihood of endorsing utilitarian choices in personal moral dilemmas.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
The reliance on hypothetical, written scenarios across moral psychology research limits our ability to confidently generalize these findings to real-life, high-stakes moral crises.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Alexithymia is associated with a greater tendency to make utilitarian moral choices, a relationship driven by a reduction in empathic concern for others.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Diminished emotional processing and reduced empathic concern predict a higher likelihood of endorsing utilitarian moral choices in personal moral dilemmas, illustrating the role of intuitive emotional systems in moral restraint.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Study at a glance
- Design
- Cross-sectional — Online survey: TAS-20 alexithymia, IRI empathy subscales, and 7-point personal/impersonal dilemma ratings; bootstrapped mediation
- N
- N=331 · Italian-speaking adults 18–60 (215 women), recruited via forums and social networks
- Population
- Volunteer Italian-speaking adults
- Outcome
- Endorsement of utilitarian harm in personal moral dilemmas, mediated by lower empathic concern at higher trait alexithymia
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
Inspect source passages
How difficulty processing emotions affects moral choices
These passages occur verbatim in the stored paper text. They support the points listed below; they do not verify every statement in the explanation.
331
With a sample size of 331, a Type II error probability of α = 0.05, and a statistical power (Type I error probability) of β = 0.80, we could detect an effect size > 0.153 (i.e., a small effect; Cohen, ).
7-point
Participants could register their answer using a 7-point Likert scale (1: not at all , 7: very much ).
Key findings
The study found that higher levels of trait alexithymia predicted lower levels of empathic concern and a higher likelihood of endorsing utilitarian choices in personal moral dilemmas. Specifically, an increase in trait alexithymia raised the odds of finding personal sacrifice appropriate, with an odds ratio of 1.025. This relationship was mediated by a reduction in empathic concern, which diminished the typical emotional aversion to causing direct harm.
Methodology
The researchers surveyed 331 Italian-speaking adults to examine the link between emotional processing and moral decision-making. Participants completed self-report scales measuring trait alexithymia and multiple dimensions of empathy. They then evaluated moral dilemmas, rating the appropriateness of sacrificing a single individual to save a larger group on a 7-point scale.
Limitations
The study cannot prove a direct causal relationship because it relied entirely on correlational, self-reported data. The sample consisted mostly of young, college-aged adults, which limits how well these findings apply to clinical populations or older age groups. Additionally, the researchers only used two hypothetical moral dilemmas, and they did not collect response time data to rule out participants who answered carelessly. Finally, a sensitivity analysis showed the study was underpowered to detect correlations smaller than 0.153, meaning some detected small correlations might be false positives.
Related papers in this topic
Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.