Learn More
Conventional analyses of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data compare the brain's response to stimulus categories (e.g., pictures of faces, stories about beliefs) across participants. In order to infer that effects observed with the specific items (a particular set of pictures or stories) are generalizable to the entire population (all faces,(More)
Intentional harms are typically judged to be morally worse than accidental harms. Distinguishing between intentional harms and accidents depends on the capacity for mental state reasoning (i.e., reasoning about beliefs and intentions), which is supported by a group of brain regions including the right temporo-parietal junction (RTPJ). Prior research has(More)
Recent behavioral evidence indicates a key role for intent in moral judgments of harmful acts (e.g. assault) but not impure acts (e.g. incest). We tested whether the neural responses in regions for mental state reasoning, including the right temporoparietal junction (RTPJ), are greater when people evaluate harmful vs impure violations. In addition, using(More)
A distinct group of brain regions, the 'Theory of Mind (ToM) network', is implicated in representing other people's mental states, yet we currently know little about which aspects of mental state attribution are represented or processed in these regions. Using fMRI, we investigated whether ToM regions, compared to language-processing regions, are sensitive(More)
Functional localizer tasks allow researchers to identify brain regions in each individual's brain, using a combination of anatomical and functional constraints. In this study, we compare three social cognitive localizer tasks, designed to efficiently identify regions in the "Pain Matrix," recruited in response to a person's physical pain, and the "Theory of(More)
Blind people's inferences about how other people see provide a window into fundamental questions about the human capacity to think about one another's thoughts. By working with blind individuals, we can ask both what kinds of representations people form about others' minds, and how much these representations depend on the observer having had similar mental(More)
Intentional harms are typically judged to be less forgivable than accidental harms. This difference depends on mental state reasoning (i.e., reasoning about beliefs and intentions), supported by a group of brain regions, the 'theory of mind' network. Prior research has found that (i) interfering with activity in this network can shift moral judgments away(More)