From cognition to compensation: Neurocomputational mechanisms of guilt-driven and shame-driven altruistic behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guilt and shame are key moral emotions that influence mental health and regulate social behavior. Although prior research has examined the psychological and neural correlates of these emotions, the cognitive antecedents that trigger them, as well as their transformation into social behavior, remain insufficiently understood. In this study, we developed a novel task to investigate how two crucial cognitive antecedents, harm and responsibility, elicit guilt and shame, and how these emotions subsequently drive compensatory behavior, by combining functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) with computational modeling. Behaviorally, we found that harm had a stronger impact on guilt than on shame, whereas responsibility had a stronger impact on shame than guilt, which supports the functionalist theory of emotion. Moreover, compared to shame, guilt exerted a greater effect on compensation. Computational modeling results indicated that the integration of harm and responsibility by individuals is consistent with the phenomenon of responsibility diffusion. The fMRI results revealed that brain regions associated with inequity representation (posterior insula) and value computation (striatum) encode this integrated measure. Furthermore, individual differences in responsibility-driven shame sensitivity were associated with activity in theory-of-mind regions (temporoparietal junction and superior temporal sulcus). Guilt– and shame-driven compensatory behavior recruited distinct neural substrates, with shame-driven compensatory sensitivity being more strongly linked to activity in the lateral prefrontal cortex, a region implicated in cognitive control. Our findings provide computational, algorithmic, and neural accounts of guilt and shame.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".