期刊文献+

权力感对道德困境判断的影响:基于CNI模型的分析 被引量:8

The Effect of Power on Moral Dilemma Judgment:An Exploration with the CNI Model
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 采用道德困境判断的CNI(consequence,norm,inaction)模型,通过两个实验考察权力感对道德困境判断的影响。实验1探讨个人权力感对道德困境判断的影响,结果显示高个人权力感显著增加被试对规则的敏感,促使个体做出道义论的道德判断。实验2考察回忆任务启动的权力感对道德困境判断的影响,发现相对于低权力感启动的被试,高权力感启动的被试在进行判断时更关注行为的结果,对规则更不敏感,这说明启动的权力感促进功利主义的道德判断,抑制道义论的道德判断。结果表明,不同类型的权力感对道德困境判断的影响存在差异。 Two experiments were conducted to investigate the influence of power on moral dilemma judgments by using the CNI model.Experiment 1 explored the influence of the personal sense of power on moral dilemma judgments.The results showed that high personal power sense significantly increased sensitivity to moral norms,and thus promoted deontological moral judgments.Experiment 2 examined the effect of the priming power on the moral dilemma judgments.It was found that compared with the participants with low power priming,those with high power priming displayed increased sensitivity to consequences and reduced sensitivity to moral norms.This suggested that power priming promoted utilitarian moral judgments and inhibited deontological moral judgments.Our findings indicate that different types of power have different influences on moral dilemmas judgments.
作者 云祥 YUN Xiang(Department of Management,Nanjing Forest Police College,Nanjing 210023)
出处 《心理与行为研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2020年第4期544-551,共8页 Studies of Psychology and Behavior
基金 江苏省高校哲学社会科学项目(2017SJB0535)。
关键词 个人权力感 权力感启动 道德困境判断 CNI模型 personal sense of power power priming moral dilemma judgment CNI model
作者简介 通讯作者:云祥,E-mail:yunx@nfpc.edu.cn。
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献94

  • 1Young, L., & Phillips, J. (2011). The paradox of moral focus. Cognition, 119, 166-178.
  • 2Young, L., & Saxe, R. (in press). The role of intent across distinct moral domains. Cognition.
  • 3Young, L., Scholz, J., & Saxe, R. (2011). Neural evidence for "intuitive prosecution": The use of mental state information for negative moral verdicts. Social Neuroscience, 6, 302-315.
  • 4Zhong, C. B., Strejcek, B., & Sivanathan, N. (2011). A clean self can render harsh moral judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 859-862.
  • 5Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment underuncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
  • 6Valdesolo, P., & DeSteno, D. (2006). Manipulations of emotional context shape moral judgment. Psychological Science, 17, 476-477.
  • 7Wheatley, T., & Haidt, J. (2005). Hypnotically induced disgust makes moral judgments more severe. Psychological Science, 16, 780-784.
  • 8Wiltermuth, S. S., Monin, B., & Chow, R. M. (2010). The orthogonality of praise and condemnation in moral judgment. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1. 302-310.
  • 9Young, L., Nichols, S., & Saxe, R. (2010). Investigating the neural and cognitive basis of moral luck: It's not what youdo but what you know. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 1, 333-349.
  • 10Baron, J. (1994). Nonconsequentialist decisions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 1-42.

共引文献76

同被引文献54

引证文献8

二级引证文献6

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部