Sindhuja Sankaran, Wiktor Soral, Karol Lewczuk, Mirosław Kofta
{"title":"控制威胁促进功利性道德判断:判断类型和控制剥夺时间的作用","authors":"Sindhuja Sankaran, Wiktor Soral, Karol Lewczuk, Mirosław Kofta","doi":"10.1111/bjso.12829","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In three studies (total <i>N</i> = 622), the effects of threat to control on subsequent moral judgement were examined. After recalling a lack-of-control experience, participants evaluated the morality of a protagonist's decisions in a series of incongruent moral dilemmas. We found that a control-threatening reminder made moral judgements more utilitarian on the deontological–utilitarian dimension, which is consistent with the control motivation theory. However, this effect depended on the type of judgement and the duration of control deprivation. It emerged only when evaluating moral legitimacy, not overall moral acceptability, and only under brief control-threatening situations, not long ones. Thus, control threat made moral reasoning more utilitarian only when factors promoting more careful, exhaustive story processing were at play. Presumably, under these conditions, the non-specific motivation to regain control—by prompting effortful processing—allowed participants to weigh the moral pros and cons before reaching a final judgement.</p>","PeriodicalId":48304,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Social Psychology","volume":"64 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Threat to control promotes utilitarian moral judgement: The role of judgement type and length of control deprivation\",\"authors\":\"Sindhuja Sankaran, Wiktor Soral, Karol Lewczuk, Mirosław Kofta\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bjso.12829\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In three studies (total <i>N</i> = 622), the effects of threat to control on subsequent moral judgement were examined. After recalling a lack-of-control experience, participants evaluated the morality of a protagonist's decisions in a series of incongruent moral dilemmas. We found that a control-threatening reminder made moral judgements more utilitarian on the deontological–utilitarian dimension, which is consistent with the control motivation theory. However, this effect depended on the type of judgement and the duration of control deprivation. It emerged only when evaluating moral legitimacy, not overall moral acceptability, and only under brief control-threatening situations, not long ones. Thus, control threat made moral reasoning more utilitarian only when factors promoting more careful, exhaustive story processing were at play. Presumably, under these conditions, the non-specific motivation to regain control—by prompting effortful processing—allowed participants to weigh the moral pros and cons before reaching a final judgement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48304,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Social Psychology\",\"volume\":\"64 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12829\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12829","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Threat to control promotes utilitarian moral judgement: The role of judgement type and length of control deprivation
In three studies (total N = 622), the effects of threat to control on subsequent moral judgement were examined. After recalling a lack-of-control experience, participants evaluated the morality of a protagonist's decisions in a series of incongruent moral dilemmas. We found that a control-threatening reminder made moral judgements more utilitarian on the deontological–utilitarian dimension, which is consistent with the control motivation theory. However, this effect depended on the type of judgement and the duration of control deprivation. It emerged only when evaluating moral legitimacy, not overall moral acceptability, and only under brief control-threatening situations, not long ones. Thus, control threat made moral reasoning more utilitarian only when factors promoting more careful, exhaustive story processing were at play. Presumably, under these conditions, the non-specific motivation to regain control—by prompting effortful processing—allowed participants to weigh the moral pros and cons before reaching a final judgement.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of Social Psychology publishes work from scholars based in all parts of the world, and manuscripts that present data on a wide range of populations inside and outside the UK. It publishes original papers in all areas of social psychology including: • social cognition • attitudes • group processes • social influence • intergroup relations • self and identity • nonverbal communication • social psychological aspects of personality, affect and emotion • language and discourse Submissions addressing these topics from a variety of approaches and methods, both quantitative and qualitative are welcomed. We publish papers of the following kinds: • empirical papers that address theoretical issues; • theoretical papers, including analyses of existing social psychological theories and presentations of theoretical innovations, extensions, or integrations; • review papers that provide an evaluation of work within a given area of social psychology and that present proposals for further research in that area; • methodological papers concerning issues that are particularly relevant to a wide range of social psychologists; • an invited agenda article as the first article in the first part of every volume. The editorial team aims to handle papers as efficiently as possible. In 2016, papers were triaged within less than a week, and the average turnaround time from receipt of the manuscript to first decision sent back to the authors was 47 days.