MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387326500 · doi:10.1111/jnp.12350

Evidence for a dissociation between moral reasoning and moral decision‐making in Tourette syndrome

2023· article· en· W4387326500 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuropsychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMoral reasoningMoral agencyMoral disengagementMoral dilemmaSocial cognitive theory of moralityTourette syndromeCognitionMoral developmentSocial psychologyMoral psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the growing interest on how Tourette syndrome (TS) affects social cognition skills, this field remains to date relatively under-explored. Here, we aim to advance knowledge on the topic by studying moral decision-making and moral reasoning in a group of adolescents with TS and a group of healthy controls. Overall, we found higher endorsement (i.e. a greater 'yes' response rate) for utilitarian solutions of incidental and instrumental moral dilemmas in TS compared to controls. By contrast, we reported an overall higher tendency of TS individuals to apply principles described in the moral foundation questionnaire to establish whether something is morally right or wrong. Our results document intact moral reasoning in TS and suggest that a deficit in suppressing inappropriate behaviours and/or altered sense of agency might be responsible for their higher utilitarian moral decision-making.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.289
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.116 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it