Moral identity and language jointly influence how bilinguals feel and decide

IF 2.4 1区 文学 Q1 LINGUISTICS
Irini Mavrou, Stavroula Mavrou, Andreas Kyriakou
{"title":"Moral identity and language jointly influence how bilinguals feel and decide","authors":"Irini Mavrou, Stavroula Mavrou, Andreas Kyriakou","doi":"10.1017/s136672892610159x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This preregistered study investigated how moral identity relates to moral decisions and emotional responses in 106 Greek–English bilinguals. Participants evaluated two sacrificial-harm and two honesty-based interpersonal moral dilemmas and completed the Moral Identity Questionnaire (Black &amp; Reynolds, 2016, <jats:italic>Personality and Individual Differences</jats:italic> , 97, 120–129). Analyses combined NHST and Bayesian approaches. Higher moral self and moral integrity scores predicted stronger emotional reactions and more deontological choices, particularly in honesty-based dilemmas. Language did not exert a reliable overall effect on moral decisions. However, participants responding in their first language (L1) reported higher moral self scores than those responding in their second language (L2), whereas moral integrity did not differ across language conditions. Emotional intensity varied by language and dilemma type: participants generally reported stronger emotions in their L2 but experienced stronger emotional intensity in response to sacrificial dilemmas in their L1. A multilevel mediation analysis indicated that emotional intensity did not reliably mediate the relationship between language and moral choices.","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":"24 1","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s136672892610159x","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This preregistered study investigated how moral identity relates to moral decisions and emotional responses in 106 Greek–English bilinguals. Participants evaluated two sacrificial-harm and two honesty-based interpersonal moral dilemmas and completed the Moral Identity Questionnaire (Black & Reynolds, 2016, Personality and Individual Differences , 97, 120–129). Analyses combined NHST and Bayesian approaches. Higher moral self and moral integrity scores predicted stronger emotional reactions and more deontological choices, particularly in honesty-based dilemmas. Language did not exert a reliable overall effect on moral decisions. However, participants responding in their first language (L1) reported higher moral self scores than those responding in their second language (L2), whereas moral integrity did not differ across language conditions. Emotional intensity varied by language and dilemma type: participants generally reported stronger emotions in their L2 but experienced stronger emotional intensity in response to sacrificial dilemmas in their L1. A multilevel mediation analysis indicated that emotional intensity did not reliably mediate the relationship between language and moral choices.
道德认同和语言共同影响双语者的感受和决定
本研究调查了106名希腊-英语双语者的道德认同与道德决策和情绪反应之间的关系。被试评估两种牺牲伤害和两种诚实为基础的人际道德困境,并完成道德认同问卷(Black & Reynolds, 2016, Personality and Individual Differences, 97, 120-129)。分析结合了NHST和贝叶斯方法。更高的道德自我和道德诚信得分预示着更强烈的情绪反应和更多的义务选择,尤其是在基于诚实的困境中。语言并没有对道德决策产生可靠的整体影响。然而,用第一语言(L1)回答的参与者比用第二语言(L2)回答的参与者报告了更高的道德自我得分,而道德诚信在不同的语言条件下没有差异。情绪强度因语言和困境类型的不同而不同:参与者在第二语言中普遍表现出更强的情绪,但在第一语言中表现出更强的牺牲困境情绪。多层次中介分析表明,情绪强度在语言与道德选择之间的中介作用不可靠。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
86
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书