Moral Reasoning Intervention on Moral Justification Abilities

San Donato Group (GSD)

Status: Completed

Conditions: Moral Development; Healthy Controls; Moral Dilemma; Moral Justification

Treatments: Other: Lecture on moral reasoning; Other: Lecture on logical reasoning

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT06735989

Moral-REA

Details and patient eligibility

About

The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the short (immediate) and mid-term (one month) impact of moral (vs non-moral) reasoning interventions on the moral justification abilities in non-expert subjects. Such an impact will be assessed by observing quantitative changes (on 1 to 4 points scale) of qualitative variables in the moral justification expressed by the subjects.

Full description

The aim of this study is to test wether a single intervention on moral reasoning can have short and/or mid-term effects on the justification of moral judgements about a problematic moral case. Focusing on justification allows to assess reasonable improvement by referring to a procedural standard, that is, without assuming any substantive normative view; namely, without evaluating a "betterment" on the basis of the content of moral judgements, but rather on the satisfaction of formal, procedural conditions in their justification. Our standard for a good moral justification consists in a set of procedural features, such as logical, empirical, and conceptual competence, openness to revision, sympathetic imagination, and bias avoidance.

Once enrolled, participants will be randomized through random.org software in the two experimental groups: 1) the moral and 2) the non-moral condition. Allocation concealment will be carried out through closed and opaque mails by a blind operator. Subjects will undergo a neuropsychological assessment and a (optional) task-based fMRI at study entry. Furthermore, during the day of the intervention (seminar: moral or logical reasoning), participants will undergo a pre-test (before the intervention) and a post-test (after the intervention) on a morally problematic case. The same test will be repeated by all participants one month after the intervention.

Enrollment: 86 patients

Sex: All

Ages: 18 to 26 years old

Volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

• University students (other than Philosophy) within the first 3 years
• Aged between 18 and 26 years old
• Italian speakers
• Oral and written informed consent to study participation

Exclusion criteria

• A current psychiatric condition
• Contraindications to MRI study (cardiac pacemakers; metal splinters or fragments; metal protheses not compatible with the magnetic field; claustrophobia; women who are pregnant or intending to become pregnant during the study; breastfeeding women).

Trial design

Primary purpose: Other

Allocation: Randomized

Interventional model: Parallel Assignment

Masking: Double Blind

---

86 participants in 2 patient groups

Moral

Experimental group

Description:

The Moral group will read a short text explaining the meaning and function of moral justification, and outlining brief descriptions of six morally relevant factors. The Moral group will then attend a 1h30 lecture on moral reasoning.

Treatment:

Other: Lecture on moral reasoning

Non-moral

Active Comparator group

Description:

The Non-moral will read a short text explaining the meaning and function of argumentation, and outlining brief descriptions of six logical and argumentative principles. The Non-moral group will then attend a 1h30 lecture on (non-moral) logical reasoning.

Treatment:

Other: Lecture on logical reasoning