Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Moral judgments depend on the integration of complex cognitive and emotional processes. Addiction is associated with core deficits in both cognitive and emotional processing, which may jointly lead to utilitarian biases in moral decision-making.
Methods: We assessed 32 polysubstance dependent males and 32 non-drug using controls using a previously validated moral judgment task, including non-moral scenarios, and moral dilemmas that were either high in emotional salience ("personal scenarios") or low in emotional salience ("impersonal scenarios").
Results: Polysubstance dependent individuals endorsed more utilitarian choices for personal dilemmas (e.g., smothering a baby to save a group of hidden people during wartime). These choices were also perceived as less difficult. Severity of alcohol use correlated with the proportion of utilitarian judgments.
Conclusion: Polysubstance dependent individuals show a more utilitarian pattern of moral decision-making for personal moral scenarios.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2012.05.038 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!