A somatic marker perspective of immoral and corrupt behavior
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals who engage in corrupt and immoral behavior are in some ways similar to individuals with psychopathy. Normal people refrain from engaging in such behaviors because they tie together the moral value of society and the risk of punishment when they violate social rules. What is it, then, that allows these immoral individuals to behave in this manner, and in some situations even to prosper? When there is a dysfunction of somatic markers, specific disadvantageous impairments in decision-making arise, as in moral judgment, but, paradoxically, under some circumstances, the damage can cause the patient to make optimal financial investment decisions. Interestingly, individuals with psychopathy, a personality disorder, share many of the same behavioral characteristics seen in VMPFC and amygdala lesion patients, suggesting that defective somatic markers may serve as a neural framework for explaining immoral and corrupt behaviors. While these sociopathic behaviors of sometimes famous and powerful individuals have long been discussed, primarily within the realm of social science and psychology, here we offer a neurocognitive perspective on the possible neural roots of immoral and corrupt behaviors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it