主观社会阶层与道德判断的关系:独立型自我构念与零和博弈信念的链式中介作用&#x0002A;

胡汉玉; 彭明; 陈天龙

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240322

PDF(668 KB)

心理科学 ›› 2024, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (3) : 688-694. DOI: 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240322

社会、人格与管理

主观社会阶层与道德判断的关系:独立型自我构念与零和博弈信念的链式中介作用^*

胡汉玉^1,2,3,4, 彭明^**1,2,3, 陈天龙^1,2,3

作者信息 +

Subjective Social Class and Moral Judgment: The Chain Mediating Roles of Independent Self-Construal and Belief of Zero-Sum Game

Hu Hanyu^1,2,3,4, Peng Ming^1,2,3, Chen Tianlong^1,2,3

Author information +

文章历史 +

摘要

本研究选取523名被试,进行道德判断、主观社会阶层、自我构念与零和博弈信念的测量,以探讨主观社会阶层与道德判断之间的中介机制。结果表明：（1）主观社会阶层显著正向预测功利型道德判断;（2）独立型自我构念和零和博弈信念在主观社会阶层预测功利型道德判断中起到链式中介作用;（3）零和博弈信念在主观社会阶层和道德判断中起遮掩作用。本研究有助于研究者深入了解社会性因素影响道德判断的机制。

Abstract

Different moral judgment tendencies reflect individuals’ different moral norms, especially in the face of moral dilemmas. Utilitarianism entails that only consequences of moral actions matter and consequences which lead to maximization of well-being for maximum number of agents ought to be preferred. According to previous studies, objective social class can positively predict utilitarian moral judgment, but there is no study about the relationship between subjective social class and utilitarian moral judgment. According to the social rank theory, the psychological root of the class difference is caused by comparing with others, which shaped the individual’s subjective social class. Thus, this study aims to investigate how the subjective social class affect sutilitarian moral judgment, which is helpful to better understand their relationship and extend the relationship to subjective social class. The theory of social cognitive suggests that class-based social cognitive patterns are shaped by the pervasive social goals, values, and expectations. Different subjective social class construct social cognition and belief differently. For example, the person who holds higher subjective social class tend to form independent self-construction, and prefer competition more than cooperation, which is the core of zero-sum game beliefs. Therefore, this study assumed that these innate cognition and intuition-based beliefs may play a mediating role between subjective social class and utilitarian moral judgment. In this study, independent self-construal and zero-sum game belief have been introduced as two mediating variables to explore their effects in the relationship between subjective social class and utilitarian moral judgment. In sum, this paper aimed to explore the relationship between subjective social class and moral judgment, and to examine the serial mediating role of independent self-construal and belief of zero-sum game.
We recruited 523 participants and utilized the moral judgment questionnaire, the MacArthur Scale of subjective social class, the self-construal scale, and the zero-sum game belief scale. Results show that: (1) The subjective social class can predict the utilitarian moral judgment positive significantly. (2) The independent self-construal and belief of zero-sum game plays a chain mediating role in the relationship between subjective social class and moral judgment. (3) Belief of zero-sum game plays a suppressing effect between the relationship of subjective social class and the utilitarian moral judgment. After controlling for the self-construal, the belief of zero-sum game can weaken the direct effect between subject social class and the utilitarian moral judgment.
The results of this study reveal a continuous mediating model, which is the basis of the relationship between subjective social class and moral judgment. We know that subject social class is formed by comparing with others, which is a sense of relationship between self and others. The belief of zero-sum game, on the other hand, is one’s belief about the world. Both are social factors that can affect our moral judgment. The findings extend the relationship between objective social class and moral judgment to subjective social class and support the hypothesis that there is a complex connection between subjective social class and utilitarian moral judgment. This conclusion contributes to a better understanding of how social factors affect moral judgment.

导出引用

胡汉玉, 彭明, 陈天龙. 主观社会阶层与道德判断的关系:独立型自我构念与零和博弈信念的链式中介作用^*[J]. 心理科学. 2024, 47(3): 688-694 https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240322

Hu Hanyu, Peng Ming, Chen Tianlong. Subjective Social Class and Moral Judgment: The Chain Mediating Roles of Independent Self-Construal and Belief of Zero-Sum Game[J]. Journal of Psychological Science. 2024, 47(3): 688-694 https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240322

参考文献

[1] 岑延远, 郑雪. (2005). 竞争性人格的心理机制分析. 华南师范大学学报(社会科学版), 1, 150-153.
[2] 陈斯颖. (2014). 大学生自我构念、自尊与社交焦虑的关系研究 (硕士学位论文).西北大学, 西安.
[3] 郭永玉, 杨沈龙, 李静, 胡小勇. (2015). 社会阶层心理学视角下的公平研究. 心理科学进展, 23(8), 1299-1311.
[4] 胡小勇, 李静, 芦学璋, 郭永玉. (2014). 社会阶层的心理学研究: 社会认知视角. 心理科学, 37(6), 1509-1517.
[5] 马磊, 刘欣. (2010). 中国城市居民的分配公平感研究. 社会学研究, 25(5), 31-49.
[6] 史宇鹏. (2018). 自我构念对疼痛共情的影响——来自ERP的证据 (硕士学位论文). 湖南师范大学, 长沙.
[7] 温忠麟, 叶宝娟. (2014). 中介效应分析: 方法和模型发展. 心理科学进展, 22(5), 731-745.
[8] 解晓娜, 李小平. (2018). 主观社会阶层对亲社会行为的影响. 心理与行为研究, 16(4), 563-569.
[9] 周浩, 龙立荣. (2004). 共同方法偏差的统计检验与控制方法. 心理科学进展, 12(6), 942-950.
[10] Adler N., Singh-Manoux A., Schwartz J., Stewart J., Matthews K., & Marmot M. G. (2008). Social status and health: A comparison of British civil servants in Whitehall-II with European- and African-Americans in CARDIA. Social Science and Medicine, 66(5), 1034-1045.
[11] Adler N. E., Epel E. S., Castellazzo G., & Ickovics J. R. (2000). Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: Preliminary data in healthy, white women. Health Psychology, 19(6), 586-592.
[12] Avramova, Y. R., Inbar, Y. (2013). Emotion and moral judgment. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 4(2), 169-178.
[13] Bartels, D. M. (2008). Principled moral sentiment and the flexibility of moral judgment and decision making. Cognition, 108(2), 381-417.
[14] Capraro, V., & Sippel, J. (2017). Gender differences in moral judgment and the evaluation of gender-specified moral agents. Cognitive Processing, 18(4), 399-405.
[15] Côté S., Piff P. K., & Willer R. (2013). For whom do the ends justify the means? Social class and utilitarian moral judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(3), 490-503.
[16] Demakakos P., Nazroo J., Breeze E., & Marmot M. (2008). Socioeconomic status and health: The role of subjective social status. Social Science and Medicine, 67(2), 330-340.
[17] Friesdorf R., Conway P., Gawronski B. (2015). Gender differences in responses to moral dilemmas: A process dissociation analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(5), 696-713.
[18] Gallo, L. C., & Matthews, K. A. (2003). Understanding the association between socioeconomic status and physical health: Do negative emotions play a role? Psychological Bulletin, 129(1), 10-51.
[19] Gawronski, B., & Beer, J. S. (2017). What makes moral dilemma judgments "utilitarian" or "deontological"? Social Neuroscience, 12(6), 626-632.
[20] Gleichgerrcht, E., & Young, L. (2013). Low levels of empathic concern predict utilitarian moral judgment. PLoS ONE, 8(4), Article e60418.
[21] Greene J. D., Nystrom L. E., Engell A. D., Darley J. M., & Cohen J. D. (2004). The neural bases of cognitive conflict and control in moral judgment. Neuron, 44(2), 389-400.
[22] Greene J. D., Sommerville R. B., Nystrom L. E., Darley J. M., & Cohen J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293(5537), 2105-2108.
[23] Gries, P. H. (2005). Social psychology and the identity-conflict debate: Is a 'China threat' inevitable? European Journal of International Relations, 11(2), 235-265.
[24] Hannikainen I. R., Machery E., & Cushman F. A. (2018). Is utilitarian sacrifice becoming more morally permissible? Cognition, 170, 95-101.
[25] Hayes A. F.(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
[26] Horberg E. J., Oveis C., Keltner D., & Cohen A. B. (2009). Disgust and the moralization of purity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 963-976.
[27] Jiang X. Y., Hu X. Y., Liu Z. Z., Sun X. M., Xue G. (2020). Greed as an adaptation to anomie: The mediating role of belief in a zero-sum game and the buffering effect of internal locus of control. Personality and Individual Differences, 152, Article 109566.
[28] Kim J. W., Lim C., Falci C. (2020). Subjective social class, perceived quality of social relationships, and happiness: A case of mediation and moderation across gender. International Sociology, 35(3), 312-335.
[29] Kraus M. W., Piff P. K., Mendoza-Denton R., Rheinschmidt M. L., & Keltner D. (2012). Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: How the rich are different from the poor. Psychological Review, 119(3), 546-572.
[30] Kraus M. W., Tan J. J. X., & Tannenbaum M. B. (2013). Locating the social ladder across cultures and identities. Psychological Inquiry, 24(2), 131-134.
[31] Kuwabara K., Yu S. Y., Lee A. J., & Galinsky A. D. (2016). Status decreases dominance in the west but increases dominance in the east. Psychological Science, 27(2), 127-137.
[32] Lee A. Y., Aaker J. L., & Gardner W. L. (2000). The pleasures and pains of distinct self-construals: The role of interdependence in regulatory focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(6), 1122-1134.
[33] Lefcourt H. M.(Ed). (1982). Locus of control: Current trends in theory & research Psychology Press Current trends in theory & research. Psychology Press.
[34] Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
[35] McNair S., Okan Y., Hadjichristidis C., & de Bruin, W. B. (2019). Age differences in moral judgment: Older adults are more deontological than younger adults. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 32(1), 47-60.
[36] Moses J. F., Dwyer P. C., Fuglestad P., Kim J., Maki A., Snyder M., & Terveen L. (2018). Encouraging online engagement: The role of interdependent self-construal and social motives in fostering online participation. Personality and Individual Differences, 133, 47-55.
[37] Murphy, D. S., & Robinson, M. B. (2008). The Maximizer: Clarifying Merton's theories of anomie and strain. Theoretical Criminology, 12(4), 501-521.
[38] Patil, I. (2015). Trait psychopathy and utilitarian moral judgement: The mediating role of action aversion. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27(3), 349-366.
[39] Paxton, J. M., & Greene, J. D. (2010). Moral reasoning: Hints and allegations. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(3), 511-527.
[40] Piff P. K., Kraus M. W., Côté S., Cheng B. H., Keltner D. (2010). Having less, giving more: The influence of social class on prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(5), 771-784.
[41] Różycka-Tran J., Boski P., & Wojciszke B. (2015). Belief in a zero-sum game as a social axiom: A 37-nation study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(4), 525-548.
[42] Sakurai K., Kawakami N., Yamaoka K., Ishikawa H., & Hashimoto H. (2010). The impact of subjective and objective social status on psychological distress among men and women in japan. Social Science and Medicine, 70(11), 1832-1839.
[43] Singelis T M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 580-591.
[44] Stellar J. E., Manzo V. M., Kraus M. W., & Keltner D. (2012). Class and compassion: Socioeconomic factors predict responses to suffering. Emotion, 12(3), 449-459.
[45] Szekely, R. D., Miu, A. C. (2015). Incidental emotions in moral dilemmas: The influence of emotion regulation. Cognition and Emotion, 29(1), 64-75.
[46] Valdesolo, P., & DeSteno, D. (2006). Manipulations of emotional context shape moral judgment. Psychological Science, 17(6), 476-477.
[47] Wiech K., Kahane G., Shackel N., Farias M., Savulescu J., & Tracey I. (2013). Cold or calculating? Reduced activity in the subgenual cingulate cortex reflects decreased emotional aversion to harming in counterintuitive utilitarian judgment. Cognition, 126(3), 364-372.
[48] Wilkinson, R. G. (1999). Health, hierarchy, and social anxiety. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 896, 48-63.
[49] Wojciszke, B. (1997). Parallels between competence- versus morality-related traits and individualistic versus collectivistic values. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27(3), 245-256.
[50] Zhang L. S., Kong M., & Li Z. Q. (2017). Emotion regulation difficulties and moral judgment in different domains: The mediation of emotional valence and arousal. Personality and Individual Differences, 109, 56-60.