Moral preferences pervade many aspects of our lives, dictating how we ought to behave, whom we can marry and even what we eat. Despite their relevance, one fundamental question remains unanswered: where do individual moral preferences come from? It is often thought that all types of preferences reflect properties of domain-general neural decision mechanisms that employ a common ‘neural currency’ to value choice options in many different contexts. This view, however, appears at odds with the observation that many humans consider it intuitively wrong to employ the same scale to compare moral value (e.g. of a human life) with material value (e.g. of money). In this paper, we directly test if moral subjective values are represented by similar neural processes as financial subjective values. In a study combining functional magnetic resonance imaging with a novel behavioral paradigm, we identify neural representations of the subjective values of human lives or financial payoffs by means of structurally identical computational models. Correlating isomorphic model variables from both domains with brain activity reveals specific patterns of neural activity that selectively represent values in the moral (right temporo-parietal junction) or financial (ventral-medial prefrontal cortex) domain. Intriguingly, our findings show that human lives and money are valued in (at least partially) distinct neural currencies, supporting theoretical proposals that human moral behavior is guided by processes that are distinct from those underlying behavior driven by personal material benefit.

In the present review, we illustrate how exposure to violence results in an increased probability of developing functional impairments of decision mechanisms necessary for moral behavior. We focus in particular on the detrimental effects of exposure to violence on emotional (e.g., Empathy), cognitive (e.g., Theory of Mind), and inhibitory control abilities. Relying on studies that document impaired moral behavior in individuals with deficits in these abilities, we propose a "model" of how exposure to violence can affect moral behavior. We then discuss how impaired moral decision making can also be a factor increasing the likelihood of reiterating violence: agents who lack abilities such as understanding and resonating with others' emotions or inhibitory control, can lead to an increase of violent displays. Thus, if not properly addressed, the noxious effects of exposure to violence on morality can lead to a violence generating cycle. We conclude proposing that interventions targeted at improving moral behavior can maximize their efficacy focusing on mitigating the impact of violence on the basic cognitive, emotional, and inhibitory abilities discussed.

Philanthropic organizations experience difficulties in obtaining support from younger generations, highlighting the need for modern fundraising strategies. Advances in technology provide a potential solution by offering alternatives to traditional fundraising practices. In an experimental study in collaboration with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), we investigated whether virtual reality (VR) could be harnessed to innovate fundraising. We customized a VR module developed by the ICRC and tested its effectiveness at eliciting donations compared to that of an on-screen version of the experience. In addition, we explored mechanisms that might drive this effect, namely the level of interactivity (active/passive) and the type of affect elicited by the module (positive—happy ending/negative—tragic ending), as well as subjective perceptions and emotions related to the experience. Our findings showed that VR, compared with an on-screen experience, led to both an increase in incentivized donations and a larger reported propensity to become regular donors. Investigating the mechanisms that might drive the effect, we found that the VR experience led to stronger emotional feelings (notably being moved and sadness) and improved quality of the experience (e.g., level of interest and vividness). We further found physiological evidence showing a significant increase in arousal for the VR condition compared with the on-screen condition, although this was not correlated with an increase in donations. Taken together, our study provides evidence that VR could be a viable tool to innovate fundraising and identifies some of the features that may make this medium more effective than traditional practices.

Hackathons for sustainable development goals (SDGs) are a widespread form of ephemeral work organization, which is aimed at innovating in special space and time settings, often outside of usual work settings. Investigating the motivations of participants in 15 such hackathons in Europe and in Asia held in 2021 and 2022, we found that the hackathon experience fosters intrinsic motivation, enables an integrated form of “play-and-work”, and gives a sense of purpose in contributing to social good. The key to mobilizing such motivational resources lies in the organizational conditions whereby a hackathon, a special spatio-temporal environment, acquires the qualities the Huizinga Magic Circle of play, encourages kairos moments, and yields an experience that is qualitatively different from the chronos routine of everyday work. The insights derived from this research inform debates in organization science along three axes. First, we show that by providing a safe space to experiment, hackathons enable experiencing freedom within boundaries. Second, hackathons for greater good align with the expectations and well-being requirements of new generations of workers. Third, hackathons provide means for organizational change without disruption. In sum, we show that hackathons for the social good can be a powerful force for stimulating people’s satisfaction as they play-and-work while contributing to the betterment of our society.

Addressing grand challenges like the UN's Sustainable Development Goals requires mobilizing voluntary collective action, yet what motivates sustained participation without traditional incentives remains unclear. We examine hackathons for SDGs – a growing form of collaborative innovation – as a case of collective action for advancing UN sustainability goals. Analyzing 299 participants across 15 SDG hackathons in six countries using pre-post surveys, qualitative interviews, and project outcomes, we reveal participants are primarily motivated by intrinsic factors and the desire to contribute to a higher purpose (~90% rated purpose highly). Critically, the collective action experience itself strengthened intrinsic motivation, with purely intrinsically motivated participants increasing by approximately 20% post-hackathon. We introduce "purposeful play-and-work"- the integration of playful experimentation with meaningful purpose - as a novel motivational mechanism sustaining voluntary participation. Participants were drawn not only by desire to contribute to sustainability but also by opportunities to experiment, create, and engage in novel social interactions. Personal preference for play and experimentation significantly predicted project success, explaining 42.7% of variance in peer-evaluated outcomes. These findings advance collective action theory by demonstrating how environments enabling purposeful play-and-work can effectively mobilize and sustain voluntary participation where traditional coordination mechanisms like monetary incentives or institutional monitoring are limited.

Moral preferences pervade many aspects of our lives, dictating how we ought to behave, whom we can marry, and even what we eat. Despite their relevance, one fundamental question remains unanswered: Where do individual moral preferences come from? It is often thought that all types of preferences reflect properties of domain-general neural decision mechanisms that employ a common “neural currency” to value choice options in many different contexts. This assumption, however, appears at odds with the observation that many humans consider it intuitively wrong to employ the same scale to compare moral value (e.g., of a human life) with material value (e.g., of money). In this paper, we directly challenge the common-currency hypothesis by comparing the neural mechanisms that represent moral and financial subjective values. In a study combining fMRI with a novel behavioral paradigm, we identify neural representations of the subjective values of human lives or financial payoffs by means of structurally identical computational models. Correlating isomorphic model variables from both domains with brain activity reveals specific patterns of neural activity that selectively represent values in the moral (in the rTPJ) or financial (in the vmPFC) domain. Thus, our findings show that human lives and money are valued in distinct neural currencies, supporting theoretical proposals that human moral behavior is guided by processes that are distinct from those underlying behavior driven by personal material benefit.