Cognitive Process Differences Between Moral Beauty Judgments and Moral Goodness Judgments.

moral beauty moral goodness perceived images

Journal

Advances in cognitive psychology
ISSN: 1895-1171
Titre abrégé: Adv Cogn Psychol
Pays: Poland
ID NLM: 101283299

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2020
Historique:
entrez: 21 7 2020
pubmed: 21 7 2020
medline: 21 7 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Goodness and beauty have always been important topics of debate in the field of philosophy and aesthetics. The present study used behavior and event-related potentials (ERPs) to investigate whether moral beauty judgments and moral goodness judgments involve different cognitive processes or the same cognitive process under different language labels for the same human act. Behavioral results showed that individuals gave significantly higher scores for a beautiful face than an ugly face when making moral beauty judgments, but there were no significant differences between the two conditions when making moral goodness judgments. The ERP experiment displayed larger P2 amplitudes and the late positive potential (LPP) amplitude was elicited when displaying beautiful faces but not ugly faces during moral beauty judgments. However, during moral goodness judgments, the P2 and LPP showed no significant differences under the two conditions. In general, we conclude that moral beauty judgments and moral goodness judgments involve different cognitive processes, although they objectively refer to the same human act. One of the most important differences between moral beauty judgments and moral goodness judgments was that the former process involved an image, whereas the latter did not. The present conclusion provides important insights into the research in aesthetic perception and moral sense.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32685060
doi: 10.5709/acp-0293-9
pmc: PMC7358606
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

160-168

Informations de copyright

Copyright: © 2020 University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw.

Références

Nature. 1994 Nov 17;372(6503):260-3
pubmed: 7969469
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1974 Apr;71(4):1207-10
pubmed: 4208546
Trends Cogn Sci. 2002 Dec 1;6(12):517-523
pubmed: 12475712
Science. 2007 May 18;316(5827):998-1002
pubmed: 17510357
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2003 Dec;3(4):289-99
pubmed: 15040549
Psychophysiology. 1994 May;31(3):291-308
pubmed: 8008793
J Cogn Neurosci. 2006 Jul;18(7):1112-9
pubmed: 16839285
J Neurosci. 2007 Jan 31;27(5):1082-9
pubmed: 17267562
Nature. 1996 Sep 19;383(6597):254-6
pubmed: 8805700
Neuropsychologia. 2007 Jan 7;45(1):195-206
pubmed: 16828125
Neuropsychologia. 2009 Jan;47(2):397-405
pubmed: 18845172
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2008 Jan;3(1):65-72
pubmed: 26158671
Biol Psychol. 1988 Jun;26(1-3):117-63
pubmed: 3061477
Emotion. 2011 Dec;11(6):1397-405
pubmed: 21859200
Neuroimage. 2002 Jul;16(3 Pt 1):696-703
pubmed: 12169253
Science. 2001 Sep 14;293(5537):2105-8
pubmed: 11557895
Prog Brain Res. 2006;156:31-51
pubmed: 17015073
Int J Psychophysiol. 2007 Jul;65(1):20-31
pubmed: 17400317
Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2003 Jun;17(1):177-87
pubmed: 12763203
J Exp Psychol Gen. 1992 Dec;121(4):459-79
pubmed: 1431739
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2003 Oct;4(10):846-9
pubmed: 14523384
Cognition. 2008 Jun;107(3):1144-54
pubmed: 18158145
Neuroimage. 2006 Jan 1;29(1):276-85
pubmed: 16087351
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2015 Jun;10(6):814-23
pubmed: 25298010
Annu Rev Psychol. 1983;34:33-61
pubmed: 6338812
Neuroimage. 2005 Feb 1;24(3):887-97
pubmed: 15652323
Science. 2004 May 21;304(5674):1167-70
pubmed: 15155951
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1993 Jul;65(1):5-17
pubmed: 8355142
Neuron. 2004 Oct 14;44(2):389-400
pubmed: 15473975
Science. 1980 Jan 11;207(4427):203-5
pubmed: 7350657
Psychophysiology. 2017 Oct;54(10):1459-1471
pubmed: 28543218
Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Aug;11(8):319-21
pubmed: 17602852
Front Psychol. 2016 Jan 11;6:2022
pubmed: 26793144
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2005 Sep;6(9):691-702
pubmed: 16136173
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1994 Oct;20(5):1000-14
pubmed: 7964526
Psychol Rev. 2001 Oct;108(4):814-34
pubmed: 11699120
J Neurosci. 2008 Mar 26;28(13):3468-73
pubmed: 18367612
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2015 Aug;10(8):1021-9
pubmed: 25556210

Auteurs

Yanhui Xiang (Y)

Cognition and Human Behavior Key Laboratory of Hunan, Department of Psychology, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, China1.

Xue Wen (X)

School of Psychology, Hainan Normal University, Hainan, China2.

Jiaxu Zhao (J)

Cognition and Human Behavior Key Laboratory of Hunan, Department of Psychology, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, China1.

Wenrui Zhang (W)

Cognition and Human Behavior Key Laboratory of Hunan, Department of Psychology, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, China1.

Yiqi Jiang (Y)

School of Psychology, Hainan Normal University, Hainan, China2.

Classifications MeSH