Rights statement: © The Author (2016). Published by Oxford University Press. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Accepted author manuscript, 172 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Rights statement: © The Author (2016). Published by Oxford University Press. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Final published version, 701 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Final published version
Licence: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - ‘Imagined guilt’ versus ‘recollected guilt’
T2 - implications for fMRI
AU - McLatchie, Neil Marvin
AU - Giner-Sorolla, Roger
AU - Derbyshire, Stuart
N1 - © The Author (2016). Published by Oxford University Press. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
PY - 2016/5
Y1 - 2016/5
N2 - Guilt is thought to maintain social harmony by motivating reparation (Haidt, 2003; Trivers, 1971). The present study compared two methodologies commonly used to identify the neural correlates of guilt. The first, imagined guilt, requires participants to read hypothetical scenarios and then imagine themselves as the protagonist. The second, recollected guilt, requires participants to reflect on times they personally experienced guilt. In the fMRI scanner, participants were presented with guilt/neutral memories and guilt/neutral hypothetical scenarios. Contrasts confirmed a priori predictions that guilt memories, relative to guilt scenarios, were associated with significantly greater activity in regions associated with affect (ACC, Caudate, Insula, OFC) and social cognition (TP, precuneus). Similarly, results indicated that guilt memories, relative to neutral memories, were also associated with greater activity in affective (ACC, amygdala, Insula, OFC) and social cognition (mPFC, TP, precuneus, TPJ) regions. There were no significant differences between guilt hypothetical scenarios and neutral hypothetical scenarios in either affective or social cognition regions. The importance of distinguishing between different guilt inductions inside the scanner are discussed. We offer explanations of our results and discuss ideas for future research.
AB - Guilt is thought to maintain social harmony by motivating reparation (Haidt, 2003; Trivers, 1971). The present study compared two methodologies commonly used to identify the neural correlates of guilt. The first, imagined guilt, requires participants to read hypothetical scenarios and then imagine themselves as the protagonist. The second, recollected guilt, requires participants to reflect on times they personally experienced guilt. In the fMRI scanner, participants were presented with guilt/neutral memories and guilt/neutral hypothetical scenarios. Contrasts confirmed a priori predictions that guilt memories, relative to guilt scenarios, were associated with significantly greater activity in regions associated with affect (ACC, Caudate, Insula, OFC) and social cognition (TP, precuneus). Similarly, results indicated that guilt memories, relative to neutral memories, were also associated with greater activity in affective (ACC, amygdala, Insula, OFC) and social cognition (mPFC, TP, precuneus, TPJ) regions. There were no significant differences between guilt hypothetical scenarios and neutral hypothetical scenarios in either affective or social cognition regions. The importance of distinguishing between different guilt inductions inside the scanner are discussed. We offer explanations of our results and discuss ideas for future research.
KW - guilt
KW - guilty feelings
KW - guilty thoughts
KW - fmri
U2 - 10.1093/scan/nsw001
DO - 10.1093/scan/nsw001
M3 - Journal article
VL - 11
SP - 703
EP - 711
JO - Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience
JF - Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience
SN - 1749-5016
IS - 5
ER -