Search

How do people make decisions? Previous psychological research consistently shed light on the fact that decisions are not the result of a pure rational reasoning, and that emotions can assume a crucial role. This is particularly true in the case of moral decision-making, which requires a complex integration of affective and cognitive processes. One question that is still open to debate concern the individual factors that can affect moral decisions. Gender has been consistently identified as a possible variable of interest for the adoption of different strategic behaviors, with men using more rational processes and women more deontological principles. In the present study we aimed at exploring the presence of gender differences in different decision-making scenarios. Results showed that the moral scenario led to a similar acceptance rate in both genders, while economic and shopping offers were more likely to be accepted by men. Also, women were more inclined to refuse unfair offers, which included a higher personal benefit at the expense of the opponent, even if this meant a total loss for both parties. Finally, correlational analyses revealed a different relation between risk propensity and decision-making in men and women in different scenarios.

It has been suggested that “sharing the same body” between the observer and the observed subject allows for a direct form of understanding and emotional attuning by a process of simulation. Then, what happens when we don’t share the same body? The aim of the present paper is to review available evidence of intra- and inter-species empathic and prosocial behaviours, with respect to within-human, within-animals and cross-specifies interactions. Similarities and differences will be evaluated using a comparative perspective, and some possible moral and ethical implications for human-animal interactions will be discussed. According to Charles Darwin’s work, the perceived differences between human and animal empathy could be more quantitative than qualitative, suggesting a common affective core which allows both categories to mirror and tune to conspecifics’ feelings, where in the case of humans it can be integrated with more complex cognitive processes.