Induced guilt and more self-disciplined moral standards in moral dilemma judgment

IF 3.6 4区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Hao Yang, Juan Guo, Y. Wu, Amaryah Hannah Robinson
{"title":"Induced guilt and more self-disciplined moral standards in moral dilemma judgment","authors":"Hao Yang, Juan Guo, Y. Wu, Amaryah Hannah Robinson","doi":"10.1080/00049530.2022.2136530","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objective The current study attempts to adopt more comprehensive and rigorous methods to deconstruct and confirm the association between guilt and moral dilemma judgements, with the expectation of providing new insights for related research. Methods A total of 170 college participants were employed in separate batches for the experiment, including 53 males and 117 females, ranging from 17 to 28 years old (M = 20.88, SD = 2.29). We first induced guilt in the subjects using recalling and writing tasks and then asked the participants to complete the moral dilemma judgement tasks. Results Results of the analysis using traditional methods showed no association between induced guilt and moral dilemma judgements. However, the results of the process dissociation analysis indicated that induced guilt is related to higher deontological inclination. Moreover, the CNI model analysis revealed that induced guilt has a stronger sensitivity to moral norms. Conclusion Induced guilt was associated with a stronger sensitivity to moral norms, which is reflected in less violation and more compliance with moral norms. There was no direct relation between induced guilt and the sensitivity to consequences and a general preference for action in moral decision-making. KEY POINTS What is already known about this topic: Previous findings on the relation of guilt in moral decision-making were not consistent. The traditional approach treats utilitarianism and deontology as bipolar opposites, which may further confound the relation between guilt and moral decision-making. Numerous studies imply that guilt increases other-oriented empathy and emotional concern for the victims. What this topic adds: Induced Guilt is associated with higher sensitivity to moral norms and will discipline one’s behaviour to be more in line with ethical standards. Induced Guilt is unrelated to utilitarian decisions about the well-being of the majority and is not involved in the inhibition and activation of action. The current study used more comprehensive and rigorous methods to clarify the potential confounding factors.","PeriodicalId":8871,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530.2022.2136530","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objective The current study attempts to adopt more comprehensive and rigorous methods to deconstruct and confirm the association between guilt and moral dilemma judgements, with the expectation of providing new insights for related research. Methods A total of 170 college participants were employed in separate batches for the experiment, including 53 males and 117 females, ranging from 17 to 28 years old (M = 20.88, SD = 2.29). We first induced guilt in the subjects using recalling and writing tasks and then asked the participants to complete the moral dilemma judgement tasks. Results Results of the analysis using traditional methods showed no association between induced guilt and moral dilemma judgements. However, the results of the process dissociation analysis indicated that induced guilt is related to higher deontological inclination. Moreover, the CNI model analysis revealed that induced guilt has a stronger sensitivity to moral norms. Conclusion Induced guilt was associated with a stronger sensitivity to moral norms, which is reflected in less violation and more compliance with moral norms. There was no direct relation between induced guilt and the sensitivity to consequences and a general preference for action in moral decision-making. KEY POINTS What is already known about this topic: Previous findings on the relation of guilt in moral decision-making were not consistent. The traditional approach treats utilitarianism and deontology as bipolar opposites, which may further confound the relation between guilt and moral decision-making. Numerous studies imply that guilt increases other-oriented empathy and emotional concern for the victims. What this topic adds: Induced Guilt is associated with higher sensitivity to moral norms and will discipline one’s behaviour to be more in line with ethical standards. Induced Guilt is unrelated to utilitarian decisions about the well-being of the majority and is not involved in the inhibition and activation of action. The current study used more comprehensive and rigorous methods to clarify the potential confounding factors.
在道德困境判断中诱发罪恶感和更自律的道德标准
【摘要】目的本研究试图采用更全面、更严谨的方法解构和证实内疚与道德困境判断之间的关联,以期为相关研究提供新的见解。方法选取170名大学生,分批次进行实验,其中男性53人,女性117人,年龄17 ~ 28岁,M = 20.88, SD = 2.29。我们首先通过回忆和写作任务诱发被试的内疚感,然后要求被试完成道德困境判断任务。结果传统方法的分析结果显示诱发内疚与道德困境判断之间没有关联。然而,过程解离分析的结果表明,诱发内疚与较高的义务倾向有关。此外,CNI模型分析显示,诱发内疚对道德规范具有更强的敏感性。结论诱发内疚与道德规范敏感性相关,表现为较少违反道德规范,较多遵守道德规范。诱发罪恶感与对后果的敏感性以及在道德决策中对行动的普遍偏好之间没有直接关系。关于这个话题的已知情况:先前关于道德决策中罪恶感关系的研究结果并不一致。传统的方法将功利主义和义务论视为两极对立,这可能会进一步混淆罪恶感与道德决策的关系。许多研究表明,内疚会增加对受害者的他人导向的同理心和情感关怀。本主题补充:诱发内疚与对道德规范的更高敏感性有关,并将约束一个人的行为,使其更符合道德标准。诱发性内疚与大多数人的福祉的功利主义决定无关,也不涉及行为的抑制和激活。目前的研究使用了更全面和严格的方法来澄清潜在的混杂因素。
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
Australian Journal of Psychology
Australian Journal of Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: Australian Journal of Psychology is the premier scientific journal of the Australian Psychological Society. It covers the entire spectrum of psychological research and receives articles on all topics within the broad scope of the discipline. The journal publishes high quality peer-reviewed articles with reviewers and associate editors providing detailed assistance to authors to reach publication. The journal publishes reports of experimental and survey studies, including reports of qualitative investigations, on pure and applied topics in the field of psychology. Articles on clinical psychology or on the professional concerns of applied psychology should be submitted to our sister journals, Australian Psychologist or Clinical Psychologist. The journal publishes occasional reviews of specific topics, theoretical pieces and commentaries on methodological issues. There are also solicited book reviews and comments Annual special issues devoted to a single topic, and guest edited by a specialist editor, are published. The journal regards itself as international in vision and will accept submissions from psychologists in all countries.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信