Table 3.
Summary of the stimulation effects on moral judgments found in Experiments 1 and 2.
| Type of TPJ stimulation | Question asked | Stimulation parameters | Intentional harm scenarios (intention to harm and a harmful outcome) | Attempted harm scenarios (intention to harm but no harmful outcome) |
Accidental harm scenarios (no intention to harm but a harmful outcome) |
Neutral scenarios (no intention to harm and no harmful outcome) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leloup et al. (present paper) | Experiment 1: Decreased excitability of rTPJ (cathodal tDCS) | “How much should the agent’s behavior be blamed?” on a scale from 1 (Not at all) to 7 (Very much). |
Stimulation electrode Size: 25 cm2 Location: CP6 Reference electrode Size: 51 cm2 Location: C3 Intensity: 0.8 mA Duration: 20’ (10’ offline – 10’ online) Current density: 0.032 mA/cm2 Total charge: 0.038 C/cm2* |
No effect | No effect | A trend to be judged as more blamable | No effect |
| Experiment 2: Increased excitability of rTPJ (cathodal tDCS) | “How much punishment tokens would you give to the agent?” on a scale from 0 punishment token to 6 punishment tokens. |
Stimulation electrode Size: 25 cm2 Location: CP6 Reference electrode Size: 51 cm2 Location: C3 Intensity: 1.5 mA Duration: 20’ (10’ offline – 10’ online) Current density: 0.06 mA/cm2 Total charge: 0.072 C/cm2* |
No effect | No effect | Judged as less punishable | No effect |
*Total charge has been calculated according to the formula used by Nitsche et al. (2003a): [intensity (A)/electrode size (cm2)] × total stimulation duration (s).