明知故犯？故意不道德行为的影响因素和心理过程

故意不道德行为是指个体在明知行为违背了道德规范,但仍采取的不道德行为。研究表明,故意不道德行为存在众多诱发因素,尤其是道德自我概念具有重要的自我调节作用,在行为发生前后都产生重要影响。本文对故意不道德行为的影响因素进行了梳理,探索其行为发生前后的心理过程,并对既有的研究框架进行了整合。未来可以更关注无意识因素和心理动机因素对不道德行为的影响和作用机制,并尝试探索网络情境中的不道德行为。     

青少年网络不道德行为与父母教养方式的关系——道德脱离、责任心、道德同一性的中介作用

研究采用问卷法,对764名青少年进行测试,用结构方程模型检验了教养方式、责任心、道德同一性、道德脱离和网络不道德行为之间的关系模型。结果表明,拒绝型教养方式通过责任心、道德同一性和道德脱离的中介来间接影响网络不道德行为。责任心可以直接作用于网络不道德行为,也可以通过道德脱离的中介来影响网络不道德行为。道德同一性只能通过道德脱离来影响不道德行为。     

组织情境下的不道德行为现象:来自道德推脱理论的解释

为什么企业中的不道德行为会屡屡发生?这是一直以来困扰组织管理实践者和学者们的难题,不道德行为的发生与发展机制已经成为心理学研究的一个重要领域。其中,心理学视角下的道德推脱理论为这一难题提供了解释思路。在企业的现实情况中,可以从员工个体和组织领导两方面维度研究各自对应的组织情境因素通过道德推脱机制对不道德行为产生的影响。未来研究的关键在于探讨和实证检验组织情境下道德推脱机制的选择偏好对不道德行为的影响作用,不断丰富和加强道德推脱对员工个体以及领导不道德行为影响机理的研究。     

何以应对道德自我威胁?道德记忆偏差的视角

人们会做出一些不道德的事情,这可能对他们积极的道德自我概念构成威胁。为了应对这种道德自我威胁,人们会表现出道德记忆偏差,即遗忘威胁道德自我的不道德事件或信息。近年来,研究者基于自传体记忆范式、游戏范式、代入范式和自我参照范式,为道德记忆偏差现象提供了证据支持。研究还进一步表明,这种道德记忆偏差可能出于应对道德自我威胁的需要,即人们希望通过有选择地遗忘来维护积极的道德自我概念。 值得注意的是,道德记忆偏差现象存在一些不一致的发现。未来研究应该寻求可能的调节变量,以整合现有不一致的发现,揭示人们使用道德记忆偏差应对道德自我威胁的情境或个体差异。此外,根据道德自我威胁的解释,道德记忆偏差的存在可能需要一定条件。人们做出有意不道德行为时,应该能够意识到自身行为有违道德标准、体验到道德自我威胁,进而表现出道德记忆偏差;但是人们在做出无意不道德行为时,可能不会体验到道德自我威胁,也就不会表现出道德记忆偏差。人们做出不太严重的不道德行为时,道德记忆偏差能够帮助人们很好地应对道德自我威胁。但是人们在做出严重违反道德的行为时,道德记忆偏差可能不足以应对道德自我威胁,该偏差可能就不复存在。 道德记忆偏差与其他应对道德自我威胁策略之间可能存在一定的联系。一种可能性是,道德记忆偏差与这些策略之间是相关补充、共同发挥作用的。还有一种可能性是,其他策略可能为道德记忆偏差的出现提供了条件。人们在做出不道德行为后,可能会通过道德推脱和自我合理化等方式来降低其道德标准,改观其对该事件的评价,从而更容易地模糊不道德行为,表现出道德记忆偏差。除应对道德自我威胁外,道德记忆偏差还存在其他可能的解释。道德记忆偏差可能源自人们的印象管理动机,即人们可能为了维护在他人面前的道德形象而表现出道德记忆偏差。道德记忆偏差还可能发生在记忆加工的不同阶段,比如该现象可能发生在编码阶段,即人们对道德事件的编码加工多于不道德事件;储存阶段,即人们可能受到积极自我图式的影响而对不道德事件产生遗忘;也可能在提取阶段,即人们可能会主动地抑制对不道德事件的提取。未来研究应关注道德记忆偏差存在条件,并在研究广度上扩展其研究范畴,在研究深度上揭示其认知机制,并探究与其他应对道德自我威胁策略的关系。     

不同道德情境中大学生的道德情绪与干预倾向:人 际身份的调节作用

由特定情境诱发的道德情绪与后续的道德干预行为关系密切;而面对不同人际身份的违规者,当事人的道德情绪感受可能差异较大。本研究以大学生为被试探究不同道德情境中道德情绪和道德干预倾向之间的关系,以及违规者人际身份在其中的作用。结果发现:(1)相比不道德程度低的情境,在不道德程度高的情境中被试感受到更多内疚、羞耻和愤怒等道德情...     

内隐和外显道德评价的比较研究——来自眼动的证据

为探索内隐道德直觉和外显道德推理在道德评价中的差异及其内在机制,此研究将道德图片内容限定在伤害/关心维度,同时考虑道德效价以及情绪唤醒度,利用眼动追踪技术,考察内隐和外显道德任务中,道德直觉和道德推理的眼动轨迹及其加工过程差异。眼动结果发现,外显和内隐任务中个体均对低唤醒道德图片的首次注视时间更短,对低唤醒不道德图片总注视时间更长; 内隐任务和外显任务早期自动化加工阶段的平均凝视时间无显著差异; 内隐任务中,对不道德图片比对道德图片晚期平均凝视时间更长,瞳孔直径在中晚期时显著增加。此研究结果提示无论是道德直觉过程还是道德推理过程都是意识和无意识之间的相互作用,但是道德直觉过程的加工可能存在时间上的滞后性。     

关于马基雅维利主义的道德心理研究

上世纪60～70年代,Christie创造了马基雅维利主义的心理学构念,而Exline,Geis和Bogart开创了关于马基雅维利主义的道德心理研究,后继研究者继承并不断完善他们的实验方法,探讨了马基雅维利主义与不道德行为(尤其是欺骗和逢迎)、道德判断(包括道德观和道德推理)、道德教育的关系。研究结果发现,尽管有证据证明马基雅维利主义与不道德行为存在密切关系,但两者是否是直接的因果关系仍存争议,不过多数学者一致认为马基雅维利主义者的不道德行为缘于其道德判断和道德教育,他们决策时将传统道德标准排除在决策标准体系之外,因此描述他们道德判断应采用"非道德"而不是"不道德"。     

德行领导与员工不道德行为、利他行为:道德推脱的中介作用

以道德推脱理论为基础,运用问卷调查法,通过对776名员工的调查,探讨了德行领导对员工不道德行为和利他行为的影响及道德推脱在这一影响中的中介作用。研究发现:(1)德行领导会抑制员工不道德行为的产生、促进员工利他行为的出现;(2)道德推脱会促进员工不道德行为的产生、抑制员工利他行为的出现;(3)德行领导通过道德推脱的完全中介作用负向影响员工的不道德行为,通过道德推脱的部分中介作用正向影响员工的利他行为。     

道德必然对个体意味着什么

从表面上看,道德自由似乎蕴含有反道德(即选择不道德行为的自由)可能性,但从本质上说,由于反道德不具备道德性,因此,道德自由不具有不道德性.     

两种道德自我调节机制下的道德行为

道德自我调节指个体根据道德自我, 从事(不从事)道德行为和不道德行为。道德自我分为状态道德自我(道德自我知觉)和特质道德自我(道德认同)。道德自我调节的负反馈机制, 指个体依据道德自我知觉, 保持道德行为的波动性, 它包含道德许可效应和道德清洁效应; 正反馈机制, 指个体依据道德认同, 保持道德行为的一致性。解释水平理论整合了正负反馈机制, 两种道德行为。未来研究需探讨公我、个体差异对道德自我调节机制的影响。     

“I can see it in your eyes”: Biased Processing and Increased Arousal in Dishonest Responses

According to self‐maintenance theory, people notice their dishonest acts and thus experience ethical dissonance between their misconduct and their positive moral self. In this view, dishonesty is facilitated by justifications that redefine moral boundaries. By contrast, the bounded ethicality approach suggests that biased perception prevents people from becoming aware of their dishonesty. We tested the key process assumptions behind these accounts using pupillary responses and fixation data and found physiological evidence for both kinds of mechanisms. In particular, physiological arousal increased at the initial stage of cheating responses. This suggests that people are on some level aware of their wrongdoings. At the same time, however, we found attentional biases that can reduce the likelihood for detecting potentially disadvantageous information. We suggest that dishonest acts come at the internal cost of increased tension, which people aim to avoid by pre‐emptive biased processing as well as post hoc justifications. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Nameless + harmless = blameless: When seemingly irrelevant factors influence judgment of (un)ethical behavior

People often make judgments about the ethicality of others’ behaviors and then decide how harshly to punish such behaviors. When they make these judgments and decisions, sometimes the victims of the unethical behavior are identifiable, and sometimes they are not. In addition, in our uncertain world, sometimes an unethical action causes harm, and sometimes it does not. We argue that a rational assessment of ethicality should not depend on the identifiability of the victim of wrongdoing or the actual harm caused if the judge and the decision maker have the same information. Yet in five laboratory studies, we show that these factors have a systematic effect on how people judge the ethicality of the perpetrator of an unethical action. Our studies show that people judge behavior as more unethical when: (1) identifiable vs. unidentifiable victims are involved and (2) the behavior leads to a negative rather than a positive outcome. We also find that people’s willingness to punish wrongdoers is consistent with their judgments, and we offer preliminary evidence on how to reduce these biases.     

Blind ethics: Closing one's eyes polarizes moral judgments and discourages dishonest behavior

Four experiments demonstrate that closing one’s eyes affects ethical judgment and behavior because it induces people to mentally simulate events more extensively. People who considered situations with their eyes closed rather than open judged immoral behaviors as more unethical and moral behaviors as more ethical. In addition, considering potential decisions with closed eyes decreased stated intentions to behave ethically and actual self-interested behavior. This relationship was mediated by the more extensive mental simulation that occurred with eyes closed rather than open, which, in turn, intensified emotional reactions to the ethical situation. We discuss the implications of these findings for moral psychology and ethical decision making.     

道德推脱对员工道德决策的影响：德行领导的调节作用

运用问卷调查的方法,以819名员工为研究被试,探讨了德行领导在道德推脱影响道德决策过程中的调节作用。采用层次回归分析的方法研究发现：德行领导对道德推脱与道德识别、道德判断之间的关系具有调节作用;但德行领导不会对道德推脱与道德意图之间的关系产生调节作用,而会对道德意图产生显著的直接影响。     

Creating an ethical organizational environment: The relationship between ethical leadership,ethical organizational climate,and unethical behavior

The purpose of this research is to provide a richer lens on the ethical organizational environment by examining the relationship between ethical leadership and unit-level unethical behavior through ethical organizational climate (EOC), with collective moral identity as a boundary condition. In testing our theoretical model, we first develop and validate a measure of EOC to address concerns with existing measures of ethical climate. Second, we examine the role of collective moral identity as a moderator of the relationship between EOC and unit unethical behavior. We discuss implications regarding the importance of developing a more comprehensive conceptualization of EOC.     

Effects of Training and Environment on Graduate Students’ Self-Rated Knowledge and Judgments of Responsible Research Behavior

Training programs, departmental/disciplinary norms, and individual factors (e.g., personality traits) have been hypothesized to influence (un)ethical behavior. This exploratory study surveyed graduate students from a single university in the American Southeast. Relationships were examined among 496 participants’ individual characteristics, training, self-rated knowledge and decision-making skills in research conduct, and judgments of ethically questionable vignettes. Key findings include the increased likelihood of unethical action by students in online programs, a negative relationship between age and unethical actions, and a negative relationship between agreeableness and reports that a peer would take an unethical action. Graduate training was unrelated to judgments of ethicality.     

Examining the moral grey zone: The role of moral disengagement,authenticity, and situational strength in predicting unethical managerial behavior

In the business context, there is a broad spectrum of practices that potentially harm others, yet might benefit the organization. We examined the influence of individual and situational differences in predicting (un)ethical behavior in these moral gray zones using an in‐basket exercise that included covert moral issues in which managers could give unethical instructions to their followers. Results show that individual differences in moral disengagement directly predicted unethical behavior and functioned as a mediator of the relationship between authenticity and unethical behavior. Furthermore, effects differed in weak compared to strong situations. Study 2, replicated the results from Study 1, developed a direct test of the situational strength hypothesis, and showed that high versus low situation strength moderated the relation of moral disengagement to unethical behavior.     

伦理氛围与亲组织非伦理行为:道德辩护的中介效应

与纯粹的私利性非伦理行为不同,亲组织非伦理行为是个体为了组织利益而实施的非伦理行为。探讨了伦理氛围对亲组织非伦理行为的影响以及道德辩护的中介作用。实证研究结果发现,自利型、关怀型伦理氛围分别对亲组织非伦理行为具有正向影响,规则型伦理氛围对亲组织非伦理行为具有负向影响,道德辩护分别在三种伦理氛围与亲组织非伦理行为关系间具有部分中介作用。