Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Outcome-oriented moral evaluation in terrorists

Nature Human Behaviour volume 1, Article number: 0118 (2017) Cite this article

Subjects

A Corrigendum to this article was published on 24 July 2017

Abstract

As shown by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, terrorism is one of the most pernicious threats to contemporary societies1. In addition to obliterating the freedom and physical integrity of victims, terrorist practices can destabilize governments, undermine civil harmony and threaten economic development1. This is tragically corroborated by the recent history of Colombia, a country marked by escalations of paramilitary terrorist violence2. Although multiple disciplines are struggling to understand these atrocities, the contributions from cognitive science have been limited. Social cognition abilities3,4,5,6,7 have been proposed as important variables in relation to criminal and violent profiles. Against this background, this study aimed to assess the moral judgements and social-cognitive profiles of 66 ex-combatants from a paramilitary terrorist group. We found that moral judgement in terrorists is abnormally guided by outcomes rather than by the integration of intentions and outcomes. This pattern was partially related to emotion recognition and proactive aggression scores but independent from other cognitive domains. In addition, moral judgement was the measure that best discriminated between terrorists and non-criminals.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Experimental design and stimuli.
Figure 2: Significant differences between groups, associations between moral judgement and other relevant factors, and ROC curve analyses.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Human Rights, Terrorism and Counter-terrorism (United Nations, 2008).

  2. Feldman, A. & Hinojosa, V. Terrorism in Colombia: logic and sources of a multidimensional and ubiquitous phenomenon. Terror. Polit. Violenc. 21, 42–61 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bennette, S., Farrington, D. & Huesmann, L. Explaining gender differences in crime and violence: the importance of social cognitive skills. Aggress. Violent Behav. 10, 263–288 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jusyte, A. & Schonenberg, M. Impaired social cognition in violent offenders: perceptual deficit or cognitive bias? Eur. Arch. Psychiatry Clin. Neurosci. 267, 257–266 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gery, I., Miljkovitch, R., Berthoz, S. & Soussignan, R. Empathy and recognition of facial expressions of emotion in sex offenders, non-sex offenders and normal controls. Psychiatry Res. 165, 252–262 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Stams, G. J. et al. The moral judgment of juvenile delinquents: a meta-analysis. J Abnorm. Child Psychol. 34, 697–713 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Harenski, C. L., Harenski, K. A., Shane, M. S. & Kiehl, K. A. Aberrant neural processing of moral violations in criminal psychopaths. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 119, 863–874 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Bohorquez, J. C., Gourley, S., Dixon, A. R., Spagat, M. & Johnson, N. F. Common ecology quantifies human insurgency. Nature 462, 911–914 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Leave Us in Peace! Targeting Civilians in Colombia’s Internal Armed Conflict (Amnesty International, 2008).

  10. Atran, S. & Ginges, J. Religious and sacred imperatives in human conflict. Science 336, 855–857 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kruglanski, A. W. et al. Terrorism — a (self) love story: redirecting the significance quest can end violence. Am. Psychol. 68, 559–575 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Giraldo, J. Colombia: The Genocidal Democracy 23–24 (Common Courage, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Moll, J., Zahn, R., de Oliveira-Souza, R., Krueger, F. & Grafman, J. Opinion: the neural basis of human moral cognition. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 6, 799–809 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gonzalez-Gadea, M. L. et al. Inter-individual cognitive variability in children with Asperger’s syndrome. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8, 575 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Philip, R. C. et al. Deficits in facial, body movement and vocal emotional processing in autism spectrum disorders. Psychol. Med. 40, 1919–1929 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Koenigs, M., Kruepke, M., Zeier, J. & Newman, J. P. Utilitarian moral judgment in psychopathy. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 7, 708–714 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Young, L., Koenigs, M., Kruepke, M. & Newman, J. P. Psychopathy increases perceived moral permissibility of accidents. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 121, 659–667 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Blair, R. J. The amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex in morality and psychopathy. Trends Cogn. Sci. 11, 387–392 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Baez, S. et al. Comparing moral judgments of patients with frontotemporal dementia and frontal stroke. JAMA Neurol. 71, 1172–1176 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Merari, A., Diamand, I., Bibi, A., Broshi, Y. & Zakin, G. Personality characteristics of ‘self martyrs’/‘suicide bombers’ and organizers of suicide attacks. Terror. Polit. Violenc. 22, 87–101 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cushman, F. Crime and punishment: distinguishing the roles of causal and intentional analyses in moral judgment. Cognition 108, 353–380 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Young, L., Cushman, F., Hauser, M. & Saxe, R. The neural basis of the interaction between theory of mind and moral judgment. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 8235–8240 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Piaget, J. The Moral Judgment of the Child (Free Press, 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Yuill, N. & Perner, J. Intentionality and knowledge in children’s judgments of actor’s responsibility and recipient’s emotional reaction. Dev. Psychol. 24, 358–365 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ames, D. L. & Fiske, S. T. Perceived intent motivates people to magnify observed harms. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 3599–3605 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Anderson, C. J. & Carter, J. On rational choice theory and the study of terrorism. Defence Peace Econ. 16, 275–282 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Victoroff, J. The mind of the terrorist. A review and critique of psychological approaches. J. Conflict Resolut. 49, 3–42 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kruglanski, A. & Orehek, E. Toward a relativity theory of rationality. Soc. Cognition 27, 639–660 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bachman, R., Paternoster, R. & Ward, S. The rationality of sexual offending: testing a deterrence/rational choice conception of sexual assault. Law Soc. Rev. 26, 343–372 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Beauregard, E. & Leclerc, B. An application of the rational choice approach to the offending process of sex offenders: a closer look at the decision-making. Sex Abuse 19, 115–133 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Matsueda, R. & Kreager, D. Deterring delinquents: a rational choice model of theft and violence. Am. Sociol. Rev. 71, 95–122 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Martin, G. Essentials of Terrorism: Concepts and Controversies (Sage, 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Nussio, E. Emotional legacies of war among former Colombian paramilitaries. Peace Conflict J. Peace Psychol. 18, 369–383 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Arjona, A. & Kalyvas, S. Rebelling Against Rebellion. Comparing Insurgent and Counterinsurgent Recruitment (Centre for Research on Inequality, Human Security and Ethnicity, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Gutiérrez-Sanin, F. Telling the difference: guerrillas and paramilitaries in the Colombian war. Polit. Soc. 36, 3–34 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Villegas, C. Motives for the enlistment and demobilization of illegal armed combatants in Colombia. Peace Conflict J. Peace Psychol. 15, 263–280 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Haidt, J. The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychol. Rev. 108, 814–834 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Guglielmo, S. Moral judgment as information processing: an integrative review. Front. Psychol. 6, 1637 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Cushman, F., Young, L. & Hauser, M. The role of conscious reasoning and intuition in moral judgment: testing three principles of harm. Psychol. Sci. 17, 1082–1089 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Greene, J. D., Nystrom, L. E., Engell, A. D., Darley, J. M. & Cohen, J. D. The neural bases of cognitive conflict and control in moral judgment. Neuron 44, 389–400 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Baez, S. et al. Integration of intention and outcome for moral judgment in frontotemporal dementia: brain structural signatures. Neurodegener. Dis. 16, 206–217 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Moran, J. M. et al. Impaired theory of mind for moral judgment in high-functioning autism. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 2688–2692 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Bongar, B. Psychology of Terrorism (Oxford Univ. Press, 2006).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  44. Skeem, J. & Cooke, D. Is criminal behavior a central component of psychopathy? conceptual directions for resolving the debate. Psychol. Assess. 22, 433–445 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Baez, S. et al. Integration of intention and outcome for moral judgment in frontotemporal dementia: brain structural signatures. Neurodegener. Dis. 16, 206–217 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Mendez, M. F. The unique predisposition to criminal violations in frontotemporal dementia. J. Am. Acad. Psychiatry Law 38, 318–323 (2010).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Mobbs, D., Lau, H. C., Jones, O. D. & Frith, C. D. Law, responsibility, and the brain. PLoS Biol. 5, e103 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. DerryBerry, P., Jones, K. & Grieve, F. Assessing the relationship among Defining Issues Test scores and crystallised and fluid intellectual indices. J. Moral Educ. 36, 475–496 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Zajenkowski, M. & Zajenkowska, A. Intelligence and aggression: the role of cognitive control and test related stress. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 81, 23–38 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Gao, Y. & Tang, S. Psychopathic personality and utilitarian moral judgment in college students. J. Crim. Just. 41, 342–349 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Cardinale, E. M. & Marsh, A. A. Impact of psychopathy on moral judgments about causing fear and physical harm. PLoS One 10, e0125708 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Koenigs, M. et al. Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgements. Nature 446, 908–911 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Shenhav, A. & Greene, J. D. Integrative moral judgment: dissociating the roles of the amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex. J. Neurosci. 34, 4741–4749 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Hesse, E. et al. Early detection of intentional harm in the human amygdala. Brain 139, 54–61 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Horgan, J. From profiles to pathways and roots to routes: perspectives from psychology on radicalization into terrorism. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 619, 80–94 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Gibbs, J. Moral Development and Reality: Beyond the Theories of Kohlberg, Hoffman and Haidt 4th edn (Oxford Univ. Press, 2013).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  57. Brazil, I. A. Considering new insights into antisociality and psychopathy. Lancet Psychiatry 2, 115–116 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Crenshaw, M. in Terrorism: Roots, Impact, Responses (ed. Howard, L. ) 71–80 (Praeger, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Taylor, M. & Horgan, J. in Terrorism, Victims and Society (ed. Silkey, A. ) (Wiley, 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Laplante, L. & Theidon, K. Transitional justice in times of conflict: Colombia’s Ley de Justicia y Paz. Mich. J. Int. Law 49, 1–60 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Wechsler, D. Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (Psychological Corporation, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Raven, J. C. Guide To Standard Progressive Matrices (HK Lewis, 1960).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Torralva, T., Roca, M., Gleichgerrcht, E., Lopez, P. & Manes, F. INECO Frontal Screening (IFS): a brief, sensitive, and specific tool to assess executive functions in dementia. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 15, 777–786 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Bruno, D. et al. Utility of the INECO frontal screening (IFS) in the detection of executive dysfunction in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Neurol. Sci. 36, 2035–2041 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Baez, S. et al. The utility of IFS (INECO Frontal Screening) for the detection of executive dysfunction in adults with bipolar disorder and ADHD. Psychiatry Res. 216, 269–276 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Gleichgerrcht, E., Roca, M., Manes, F. & Torralva, T. Comparing the clinical usefulness of the Institute of Cognitive Neurology (INECO) Frontal Screening (IFS) and the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) in frontotemporal dementia. J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. 33, 997–1004 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Custodio, N. et al. Evaluation of the INECO Frontal Screening and the Frontal Assessment Battery in Peruvian patients with Alzheimer’s disease and behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia. J. Neurol. Sci. 5, 25–29 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Gonzalez-Gadea, M. L. et al. Emotion recognition and cognitive empathy deficits in adolescent offenders revealed by context-sensitive tasks. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8, 850 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Juarez, F. & Montejo, M. Psychometric properties of the Situation and Aggressive Behavior Inventory and the Motives for Aggression Inventory. Univ. Psychol. 7, 149–171 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Andreu, J. M., Ramírez, J. M. & Raine, A. Un modelo dicotómico de la agresión: valorción mediante dos auto-informes (CAMA y RPQ). Psicopatol. Clín. Legal Forens. 5, 25–42 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  71. McDonald, S., Flanagan, S., Rollins, J. & Kinch, J. TASIT: a new clinical tool for assessing social perception after traumatic brain injury. J. Head Trauma Rehabil. 18, 219–238 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Miller, M. B. et al. Abnormal moral reasoning in complete and partial callosotomy patients. Neuropsychologia 48, 2215–2220 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Young, L. et al. Damage to ventromedial prefrontal cortex impairs judgment of harmful intent. Neuron 65, 845–851 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Young, L., Camprodon, J. A., Hauser, M., Pascual-Leone, A. & Saxe, R. Disruption of the right temporoparietal junction with transcranial magnetic stimulation reduces the role of beliefs in moral judgments. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 6753–6758 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Young, L. & Saxe, R. The neural basis of belief encoding and integration in moral judgment. Neuroimage 40, 1912–1920 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Young, L. & Saxe, R. An FMRI investigation of spontaneous mental state inference for moral judgment. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 21, 1396–1405 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Baez, S. et al. Integrating intention and context: assessing social cognition in adults with Asperger syndrome. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 6, 302 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Faraggi, D. & Reiser, B. Estimation of the area under the ROC curve. Stat. Med. 21, 3093–3106 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Tripepi, G., Jager, K. J., Dekker, F. W. & Zoccali, C. Diagnostic methods 2: receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Kidney Int. 76, 252–256 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Noble, W. S. What is a support vector machine? Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 1565–1567 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Hall, M. et al. The WEKA data mining software: an update. SIGKDD Explor. 11, 10–18 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by grants from CONICET, CONICYT/FONDECYT Regular (1170010), FONCyT-PICT 2012-0412, FONCyT-PICT 2012-1309, FONDAP 15150012 and the INECO Foundation. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Sandra Baez and Eduar Herrera: These authors contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience (LPEN), Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCyT), INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Pacheco de Melo 1860, Buenos Aires, C1126AAB, Argentina

    Sandra Baez, Eduar Herrera, Adolfo M. García, Facundo Manes & Agustín Ibáñez

  2. Universidad de los Andes, Carrera 1 18a-12, Bogotá, 111711, Colombia

    Sandra Baez

  3. National Scientific and Technical Research Council (CONICET), Godoy Cruz 2290, Buenos Aires, C1425FQB, Argentina

    Sandra Baez, Eduar Herrera, Adolfo M. García, Facundo Manes & Agustín Ibáñez

  4. Departamento de Estudios Psicológicos, Universidad ICESI, Calle 18 No. 122-135, Santiago del Cali, Valle del Cauca, Colombia

    Eduar Herrera

  5. Faculty of Education, National University of Cuyo (UNCuyo), Sobremonte 74, Mendoza, C5500, Argentina

    Adolfo M. García

  6. Center for Social and Cognitive Neuroscience (CSCN), School of Psychology, Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Avenida Presidente Errázuriz 3328, Santiago de Chile, Chile

    Facundo Manes & Agustín Ibáñez

  7. Department of Psychology, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts 02467, USA

    Liane Young

  8. ARC Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders, Sydney, Macquarie University, New South Wales, 2109, Australia

    Agustín Ibáñez

  9. Universidad Autónoma del Caribe, Calle 90 46-112, Barranquilla, C2754, Atlántico, Colombia

    Agustín Ibáñez

Authors
  1. Sandra Baez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eduar Herrera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adolfo M. García
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Facundo Manes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Liane Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Agustín Ibáñez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.B., E.H. and A.I. developed the study concept and the study design; E.H. performed testing and data collection; S.B. and A.M.G. performed the data analysis and interpretation under the supervision of A.I.; S.B., E.H., L.Y. and A.I. drafted the manuscript; and A.I., A.M.G., F.M. and L.Y. provided critical revisions. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript for submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Agustín Ibáñez.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Discussion (S1–S7), Supplementary Figures 1–2, Supplementary References. (PDF 267 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baez, S., Herrera, E., García, A. et al. Outcome-oriented moral evaluation in terrorists. Nat Hum Behav 1, 0118 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0118

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0118

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing