预测对集体不法行为的情绪和行为反应:想象中的集体内疚与经历过的集体内疚对道德行为的影响

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Fabian Bernhard, Udo Rudolph
{"title":"预测对集体不法行为的情绪和行为反应:想象中的集体内疚与经历过的集体内疚对道德行为的影响","authors":"Fabian Bernhard,&nbsp;Udo Rudolph","doi":"10.1002/bdm.2410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Past research has shown that people are inconsistent when making predictions about emotions and moral behaviors following their own wrongdoing. However, it is less clear how people react when they did not cause the wrongdoing themselves but the group or collective they associate with. The present paper investigates people's reactions to collective wrongdoing and the question (1) whether the prediction of the experience of group-based guilt is related to actual moral behaviors and (2) whether this prediction is reliable. In three studies, we analyze collective guilt and subsequent behavioral reactions. Study 1 involved real academic situations, varying the kind of unfair treatment of others. A priori, participants overestimated their own subsequent experiences of collective guilt as well as their moral behavior. With respect to actual responses, experienced guilt was the strongest predictor of behavioral reactions, while imagined guilt, in-group identification and satisfaction did not significantly predict responses. Moreover, participants also reacted more to the direct harm caused by their group to others than to unjustified privileges granted to others. Study 2 fully replicated these results and showed relative stability in the predictions of collective guilt. Study 3 compared the responses by participants of the previous two studies with their responses 5 years later, indicating high stability of the observed effects over time. Also, we observed that making repeated predictions after experiencing the guilt-eliciting situation did not improve the accuracy of our participants' predictions. We discuss the implications of these findings for self-predictions, behavioral and affective forecasting of collective emotions, and for common assessment methods of guilt by hypothetical vignettes.</p>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bdm.2410","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Predicting Emotional and Behavioral Reactions to Collective Wrongdoing: Effects of Imagined Versus Experienced Collective Guilt on Moral Behavior\",\"authors\":\"Fabian Bernhard,&nbsp;Udo Rudolph\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/bdm.2410\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Past research has shown that people are inconsistent when making predictions about emotions and moral behaviors following their own wrongdoing. However, it is less clear how people react when they did not cause the wrongdoing themselves but the group or collective they associate with. The present paper investigates people's reactions to collective wrongdoing and the question (1) whether the prediction of the experience of group-based guilt is related to actual moral behaviors and (2) whether this prediction is reliable. In three studies, we analyze collective guilt and subsequent behavioral reactions. Study 1 involved real academic situations, varying the kind of unfair treatment of others. A priori, participants overestimated their own subsequent experiences of collective guilt as well as their moral behavior. With respect to actual responses, experienced guilt was the strongest predictor of behavioral reactions, while imagined guilt, in-group identification and satisfaction did not significantly predict responses. Moreover, participants also reacted more to the direct harm caused by their group to others than to unjustified privileges granted to others. Study 2 fully replicated these results and showed relative stability in the predictions of collective guilt. Study 3 compared the responses by participants of the previous two studies with their responses 5 years later, indicating high stability of the observed effects over time. Also, we observed that making repeated predictions after experiencing the guilt-eliciting situation did not improve the accuracy of our participants' predictions. We discuss the implications of these findings for self-predictions, behavioral and affective forecasting of collective emotions, and for common assessment methods of guilt by hypothetical vignettes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48112,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bdm.2410\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.2410\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.2410","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

过去的研究表明,人们在预测自己犯错后的情绪和道德行为时,会出现不一致的情况。然而,当不法行为不是由他们自己造成,而是由他们所联系的群体或集体造成时,人们会做出怎样的反应就不那么清楚了。本文研究了人们对集体不法行为的反应,并探讨了以下问题:(1) 对基于群体的内疚体验的预测是否与实际道德行为相关;(2) 这种预测是否可靠。在三项研究中,我们分析了集体内疚感和随后的行为反应。研究 1 涉及真实的学术情境,改变了对他人不公平待遇的种类。参与者先验地高估了自己随后的集体内疚体验以及道德行为。在实际反应方面,体验到的内疚感对行为反应的预测作用最大,而想象中的内疚感、群体内认同感和满意度对反应的预测作用不大。此外,参与者对其群体对他人造成的直接伤害的反应也比对他人获得的不合理特权的反应更大。研究 2 完全复制了这些结果,并显示了集体内疚感预测的相对稳定性。研究 3 比较了前两次研究中参与者的反应和他们 5 年后的反应,结果表明观察到的效果随着时间的推移具有高度稳定性。此外,我们还观察到,在经历了诱发内疚的情境后,重复预测并不能提高参与者预测的准确性。我们讨论了这些发现对自我预测、集体情绪的行为和情感预测以及通过假设小故事对内疚感进行评估的常用方法的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Predicting Emotional and Behavioral Reactions to Collective Wrongdoing: Effects of Imagined Versus Experienced Collective Guilt on Moral Behavior

Predicting Emotional and Behavioral Reactions to Collective Wrongdoing: Effects of Imagined Versus Experienced Collective Guilt on Moral Behavior

Past research has shown that people are inconsistent when making predictions about emotions and moral behaviors following their own wrongdoing. However, it is less clear how people react when they did not cause the wrongdoing themselves but the group or collective they associate with. The present paper investigates people's reactions to collective wrongdoing and the question (1) whether the prediction of the experience of group-based guilt is related to actual moral behaviors and (2) whether this prediction is reliable. In three studies, we analyze collective guilt and subsequent behavioral reactions. Study 1 involved real academic situations, varying the kind of unfair treatment of others. A priori, participants overestimated their own subsequent experiences of collective guilt as well as their moral behavior. With respect to actual responses, experienced guilt was the strongest predictor of behavioral reactions, while imagined guilt, in-group identification and satisfaction did not significantly predict responses. Moreover, participants also reacted more to the direct harm caused by their group to others than to unjustified privileges granted to others. Study 2 fully replicated these results and showed relative stability in the predictions of collective guilt. Study 3 compared the responses by participants of the previous two studies with their responses 5 years later, indicating high stability of the observed effects over time. Also, we observed that making repeated predictions after experiencing the guilt-eliciting situation did not improve the accuracy of our participants' predictions. We discuss the implications of these findings for self-predictions, behavioral and affective forecasting of collective emotions, and for common assessment methods of guilt by hypothetical vignettes.

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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Journal of Behavioral Decision Making is a multidisciplinary journal with a broad base of content and style. It publishes original empirical reports, critical review papers, theoretical analyses and methodological contributions. The Journal also features book, software and decision aiding technique reviews, abstracts of important articles published elsewhere and teaching suggestions. The objective of the Journal is to present and stimulate behavioral research on decision making and to provide a forum for the evaluation of complementary, contrasting and conflicting perspectives. These perspectives include psychology, management science, sociology, political science and economics. Studies of behavioral decision making in naturalistic and applied settings are encouraged.
×
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