發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-06-25 11:09

  本文選題：道德自我知覺(jué) + 道德自我調(diào)節(jié)　； 參考：《四川師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：道德自我調(diào)節(jié)就是個(gè)體根據(jù)道德自我,對(duì)自己是否實(shí)施道德行為進(jìn)行選擇。已有研究的結(jié)果表明啟動(dòng)道德自我知覺(jué)會(huì)激發(fā)個(gè)體的道德自我調(diào)節(jié)機(jī)制,而且表現(xiàn)出道德自我調(diào)節(jié)的補(bǔ)償性,而啟動(dòng)道德認(rèn)同,則表現(xiàn)為道德自我調(diào)節(jié)的一致性。這一概念常常和道德判斷、道德評(píng)價(jià)研究聯(lián)系在一起,人們?cè)谶M(jìn)行道德判斷時(shí)往往會(huì)有行為與自己宣稱的道德態(tài)度不一致,或者同樣的不道德行為,認(rèn)為別人做比自己做更不道德的現(xiàn)象,這就是道德偽善。曾有研究者提出人們?cè)诨貞涀约旱牡赖滦袨橹��?會(huì)產(chǎn)生一種我之后不必再表現(xiàn)得如此道德的傾向,所以產(chǎn)生了道德偽善。而在道德自我調(diào)節(jié)的反饋機(jī)制中,還包括道德凈化效應(yīng),個(gè)體在回憶自己的不道德行為之后,繼而會(huì)增加道德行為以維護(hù)自己的道德形象。如果如研究所言,道德心理許可效應(yīng)的出現(xiàn)引發(fā)了人們的道德偽善出現(xiàn),那么道德凈化效應(yīng)是否可以消除或者減弱道德偽善現(xiàn)象呢?與道德自我知覺(jué)有關(guān)的道德自我調(diào)節(jié)對(duì)人際層面道德偽善又將產(chǎn)生何種影響呢?本研究在總結(jié)歸納前人研究成果的基礎(chǔ)之上,將道德自我調(diào)節(jié)負(fù)反饋機(jī)制中的兩種效應(yīng)都納入到道德偽善兩個(gè)方面的研究領(lǐng)域,全面的考察道德自我調(diào)節(jié)對(duì)大學(xué)生道德偽善的影響作用。之前對(duì)該主題的研究主要側(cè)重于對(duì)他人和自己道德行為評(píng)價(jià)的差異上,本研究也將通過(guò)兩個(gè)研究同時(shí)考察個(gè)體層面和人際層面的道德偽善在這兩種效應(yīng)的作用下會(huì)如何表現(xiàn)。本研究對(duì)四川師范大學(xué)本部及廣漢校區(qū)的106為大學(xué)生進(jìn)行研究,研究一中,被試首先通過(guò)用積極詞匯、消極詞匯、中性詞匯為關(guān)鍵詞回憶過(guò)去的行為,完成啟動(dòng)任務(wù),再采用任務(wù)分配范式來(lái)研究個(gè)體層面道德偽善;研究二的第一步也是道德自我知覺(jué)的啟動(dòng)任務(wù),再通過(guò)對(duì)各種道德情境中,當(dāng)事人為自己和他人時(shí),對(duì)主人公當(dāng)事人的不道德行為進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià),以研究人際層面的道德偽善。實(shí)驗(yàn)研究結(jié)論如下:(1)大學(xué)生在日常狀態(tài)及道德自我凸顯時(shí),會(huì)出現(xiàn)個(gè)體層面道德偽善,但二者差異不顯著,不能完全證明是由道德心理許可效應(yīng)導(dǎo)致了道德偽善,只能說(shuō)明在道德心理許可效應(yīng)下,存在個(gè)體層面道德偽善。(2)大學(xué)生在道德自我受到威脅時(shí),個(gè)體層面沒(méi)有道德偽善現(xiàn)象,證明此時(shí)道德凈化效應(yīng)可以有效地減少個(gè)體層面道德偽善。(3)大學(xué)生在對(duì)自己和他人的不道德行為進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià)時(shí),不存在人際層面道德偽善現(xiàn)象,且對(duì)自己的評(píng)價(jià)低于對(duì)他人的評(píng)價(jià),對(duì)自己的道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn)更嚴(yán)格。(4)當(dāng)?shù)赖伦晕彝癸@時(shí),大學(xué)生對(duì)不道德行為的評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)比平時(shí)寬松,道德自我受到威脅時(shí),大學(xué)生的道德評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)比平時(shí)更寬松。也就是說(shuō)在道德心理許可效應(yīng)和道德凈化效應(yīng)作用下,大學(xué)生的道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn)更加寬松。
[Abstract]:Moral self-regulation is an individual's choice whether to carry out moral behavior according to moral self. The results have shown that starting moral self-perception can stimulate the moral self-regulation mechanism of individuals and show the compensatory nature of moral self-regulation, while the initiation of moral identity is the consistency of moral self-regulation. This concept is often associated with moral judgment, the study of moral evaluation, in which people tend to act inconsistently with their declared moral attitudes, or in the same immoral manner. It is moral hypocrisy to think that others are more immoral than themselves. Some researchers have suggested that when people recall their moral behavior, they will have a tendency that I don't have to be so moral after that, so it produces moral hypocrisy. In the feedback mechanism of moral self-regulation, the effect of moral purification is also included. After recalling one's immoral behavior, the individual will increase moral behavior to maintain his moral image. If, as the research has said, the appearance of moral psychological permission effect leads to the emergence of moral hypocrisy, can moral purification effect eliminate or weaken the phenomenon of moral hypocrisy? How does moral self-regulation related to moral self-perception affect moral hypocrisy on interpersonal level? On the basis of summing up the previous research results, this study brings the two effects of moral self-regulation negative feedback mechanism into the research field of moral hypocrisy. To investigate the effect of moral self-regulation on moral hypocrisy of college students. Previous studies on this subject focused on the differences in the evaluation of other people's and their own moral behaviors. This study will also examine how moral hypocrisy at the individual and interpersonal levels behaves under the influence of these two effects at the same time. In this study, 106 college students from Sichuan normal University and Guanghan University were studied. In the first middle school, the subjects completed the starting task by using positive words, negative words and neutral words as keywords to recall past behaviors. The first step of the study is also the priming task of moral self-perception, and then through the study of various moral situations, when the parties are for themselves and others, the first step is to study moral hypocrisy at the individual level, and the first step of the study is to start the task of moral self-perception. The immoral behavior of the protagonist is evaluated to study the moral hypocrisy in interpersonal level. The conclusions of the experiment are as follows: (1) moral hypocrisy on the individual level will appear in college students in their daily state and moral self-prominence, but the difference between the two is not significant, and it can not be fully proved that moral hypocrisy is caused by moral psychological permission effect. It can only show that there is moral hypocrisy on the individual level under the moral psychological permission effect. (2) there is no moral hypocrisy at the individual level when the moral self is threatened. It is proved that the effect of moral purification can effectively reduce the moral hypocrisy at the individual level. (3) there is no moral hypocrisy at the interpersonal level when college students evaluate the immoral behavior of themselves and others. And the evaluation of their own is lower than that of others, and their moral standards are more strict. (4) when the moral self-highlighting, college students' evaluation of immoral behavior is looser than usual, and the moral self is threatened. The moral evaluation standards of college students are more relaxed than usual. In other words, under the effect of moral psychological permission and moral purification, the moral standards of college students are more relaxed.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：四川師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：B844.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 孫嘉卿;顧璇;吳嵩;王雪;金盛華;;道德偽善的心理機(jī)制:基于雙加工理論的解讀[J];中國(guó)臨床心理學(xué)雜志;2012年04期

2 吳寶沛;高樹玲;;道德虛偽:一種機(jī)會(huì)主義的適應(yīng)策略[J];心理科學(xué)進(jìn)展;2012年06期

3 廖鳳林;蒲小波;;大學(xué)生作弊:是道德自我欺騙嗎?[J];心理科學(xué);2011年06期

4 李雁晨;周庭銳;周t;;解釋水平理論:從時(shí)間距離到心理距離[J];心理科學(xué)進(jìn)展;2009年04期

5 施利承;;怎樣才是有道德的人——從“道德偽善”反觀學(xué)校道德教育[J];教育科學(xué)研究;2008年04期

6 寇_g;徐華女;;論道德偽善——對(duì)人性的一種剖析[J];清華大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年06期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 吳志洪;道德自我調(diào)節(jié)：補(bǔ)償性還是一致性?[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2016年

2 王昭昭;清潔自我對(duì)道德偽善的影響[D];湖北大學(xué);2013年

3 權(quán)方英;道德偽善：道德判斷的內(nèi)—外團(tuán)體效應(yīng)[D];廣西師范大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：2065708