Moral Decision-Making, Machiavellianism, and Social Cognition in Autism: An Exploratory Study.

PURPOSE: The study explored moral decision-making in autistic and neurotypical individuals through a set of moral dilemmas that varied in the intentionality of harm and personal risk involvement. In addition, the role of Theory of Mind (ToM), empathy, and Machiavellian attitudes was explored. METHODS: Twenty autistic (mean chronological age 21.60 ± 8.10; mean years of education 12.40 ± 1.93) and twenty-nine neurotypical (mean chronological age 22.28 ± 2.8; mean years of education 14.38 ± 2.27) adolescents and adults participated in the study. Mixed-design repeated-measures ANOVAs were conducted to examine the effects of group and dilemma characteristics. Exploratory correlations were performed between individual difference measures and utilitarian choices in both groups. RESULTS: Our results showed overall similar response patterns between the groups, with higher moral acceptability ratings for utilitarian actions in incidental than in instrumental dilemmas. Both groups showed a reduction in utilitarian choices in instrumental dilemmas, although this pattern was less pronounced in the autistic group. Personal risk involvement increased utilitarian choices in the neurotypical group, whereas it did not significantly influence choices in the autistic group. Autistic participants reported lower empathy and ToM abilities, whereas no significant differences emerged in Machiavellianism. Nevertheless, exploratory correlations suggested relationships between ToM, Machiavellianism, and utilitarian choices in specific dilemma conditions within each group. CONCLUSION: Moral decision-making in autistic individuals was broadly comparable to that of neurotypical individuals in overall outcomes, while context-dependent patterns may reflect differences in how harm intentionality, personal involvement, and normative constraints are integrated into moral decision-making.