道德效应:自我导向情绪及其对罪责归因的影响

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Elisabetta Sirgiovanni, Joanna Smolenski, Ben Abelson, Taylor Webb
{"title":"道德效应:自我导向情绪及其对罪责归因的影响","authors":"Elisabetta Sirgiovanni, Joanna Smolenski, Ben Abelson, Taylor Webb","doi":"10.3389/fnint.2023.1232523","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionA general trend in the psychological literature suggests that guilt contributes to morality more than shame does. Unlike shame-prone individuals, guilt-prone individuals internalize the causality of negative events, attribute responsibility in the first person, and engage in responsible behavior. However, it is not known how guilt- and shame-proneness interact with the attribution of responsibility to others.MethodsIn two Web-based experiments, participants reported their attributions of moral culpability (i.e., responsibility, causality, punishment and decision-making) about morally ambiguous acts of killing in different conditions. In Study 1 the vignettes were presented in the 1st person, while in Study 2 in the 3rd person. To test proneness to guilt and shame, we utilized the GASP scale, which differentiates between the affective and behavioral components of each emotion. Statistical analyses were performed in Matlab and R.ResultsWe found that guilt- and shame-proneness were associated with the severity of attributions in both the first and the third person, but the effect was strong only in the guilt case (both subtypes) and shame-affect case, and not in the shame-behavior case. We call this the Moralizing Effect.DiscussionWe wonder whether our finding that guilt-prone people tend to attribute a higher degree of culpability to others is really consistent with the view that guilt motivates people to choose the “moral paths in life”. This echoes views about the harmful aspects of guilt, which have been expressed historically in philosophy, for example, by Friedrich Nietzsche.","PeriodicalId":56016,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience","volume":"111 2-4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Moralizing Effect: self-directed emotions and their impact on culpability attributions\",\"authors\":\"Elisabetta Sirgiovanni, Joanna Smolenski, Ben Abelson, Taylor Webb\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fnint.2023.1232523\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"IntroductionA general trend in the psychological literature suggests that guilt contributes to morality more than shame does. Unlike shame-prone individuals, guilt-prone individuals internalize the causality of negative events, attribute responsibility in the first person, and engage in responsible behavior. However, it is not known how guilt- and shame-proneness interact with the attribution of responsibility to others.MethodsIn two Web-based experiments, participants reported their attributions of moral culpability (i.e., responsibility, causality, punishment and decision-making) about morally ambiguous acts of killing in different conditions. In Study 1 the vignettes were presented in the 1st person, while in Study 2 in the 3rd person. To test proneness to guilt and shame, we utilized the GASP scale, which differentiates between the affective and behavioral components of each emotion. Statistical analyses were performed in Matlab and R.ResultsWe found that guilt- and shame-proneness were associated with the severity of attributions in both the first and the third person, but the effect was strong only in the guilt case (both subtypes) and shame-affect case, and not in the shame-behavior case. We call this the Moralizing Effect.DiscussionWe wonder whether our finding that guilt-prone people tend to attribute a higher degree of culpability to others is really consistent with the view that guilt motivates people to choose the “moral paths in life”. This echoes views about the harmful aspects of guilt, which have been expressed historically in philosophy, for example, by Friedrich Nietzsche.\",\"PeriodicalId\":56016,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\"111 2-4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2023.1232523\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2023.1232523","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

心理学文献中的一个普遍趋势表明,内疚对道德的贡献大于羞耻。与羞耻倾向的个体不同,内疚倾向的个体内化负面事件的因果关系,将责任归于第一人称,并从事负责任的行为。然而,我们不知道内疚和羞耻倾向是如何与责任归因他人相互作用的。方法在两个基于网络的实验中,参与者报告了他们在不同条件下对道德上模棱两可的杀戮行为的道德罪责归因(即责任、因果关系、惩罚和决策)。在研究1中,小插曲以第一人称呈现,而在研究2中以第三人称呈现。为了测试内疚和羞耻的倾向,我们使用了GASP量表,该量表区分了每种情绪的情感和行为成分。结果我们发现内疚和羞耻倾向与第一人称和第三人称归因的严重程度相关,但这种影响仅在内疚情况(两个亚型)和羞耻-情感情况下强烈,而在羞耻-行为情况下没有。我们称之为道德效应。我们想知道,容易内疚的人倾向于把更高程度的罪责归咎于他人,这一发现是否真的与内疚促使人们选择“生活中的道德道路”的观点相一致。这与关于罪恶感有害方面的观点相呼应,这些观点在历史上的哲学中已经表达过,例如弗里德里希·尼采。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Moralizing Effect: self-directed emotions and their impact on culpability attributions
IntroductionA general trend in the psychological literature suggests that guilt contributes to morality more than shame does. Unlike shame-prone individuals, guilt-prone individuals internalize the causality of negative events, attribute responsibility in the first person, and engage in responsible behavior. However, it is not known how guilt- and shame-proneness interact with the attribution of responsibility to others.MethodsIn two Web-based experiments, participants reported their attributions of moral culpability (i.e., responsibility, causality, punishment and decision-making) about morally ambiguous acts of killing in different conditions. In Study 1 the vignettes were presented in the 1st person, while in Study 2 in the 3rd person. To test proneness to guilt and shame, we utilized the GASP scale, which differentiates between the affective and behavioral components of each emotion. Statistical analyses were performed in Matlab and R.ResultsWe found that guilt- and shame-proneness were associated with the severity of attributions in both the first and the third person, but the effect was strong only in the guilt case (both subtypes) and shame-affect case, and not in the shame-behavior case. We call this the Moralizing Effect.DiscussionWe wonder whether our finding that guilt-prone people tend to attribute a higher degree of culpability to others is really consistent with the view that guilt motivates people to choose the “moral paths in life”. This echoes views about the harmful aspects of guilt, which have been expressed historically in philosophy, for example, by Friedrich Nietzsche.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience Neuroscience-Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
2.90%
发文量
148
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research that synthesizes multiple facets of brain structure and function, to better understand how multiple diverse functions are integrated to produce complex behaviors. Led by an outstanding Editorial Board of international experts, this multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide. Our goal is to publish research related to furthering the understanding of the integrative mechanisms underlying brain functioning across one or more interacting levels of neural organization. In most real life experiences, sensory inputs from several modalities converge and interact in a manner that influences perception and actions generating purposeful and social behaviors. The journal is therefore focused on the primary questions of how multiple sensory, cognitive and emotional processes merge to produce coordinated complex behavior. It is questions such as this that cannot be answered at a single level – an ion channel, a neuron or a synapse – that we wish to focus on. In Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience we welcome in vitro or in vivo investigations across the molecular, cellular, and systems and behavioral level. Research in any species and at any stage of development and aging that are focused at understanding integration mechanisms underlying emergent properties of the brain and behavior are welcome.
×
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