Batson C Daniel, Thompson Elizabeth R, Chen Hubert
Department of Psychology, University of Kansas, Lawrence 66045, USA.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2002 Aug;83(2):330-9.
Two studies addressed alternative explanations for 3 pieces of evidence supporting the existence of moral hypocrisy. In Study 1, no support was found for the idea that low salience of social standards accounts for falsifying the result of a coin flip to assign oneself a more desirable task. In Study 2, no support was found for the idea that responses of those who honestly win the flip account for the higher ratings of morality of their action by participants who assign themselves the more desirable task after flipping the coin. Also, no support was found for the idea that responses of those who honestly win the flip account for the inability of personal moral responsibility measures to predict moral action. Instead, results of both studies provided additional evidence of moral hypocrisy.
两项研究探讨了对支持道德伪善存在的三条证据的其他解释。在研究1中，没有证据支持以下观点：社会标准的低显著性导致人们在抛硬币决定给自己分配更理想任务时伪造硬币抛掷结果。在研究2中，没有证据支持以下观点：在抛硬币后给自己分配更理想任务的参与者，因其行为的道德评价较高，是由那些诚实地赢得抛硬币的人的反应所导致的。此外，也没有证据支持以下观点：那些诚实地赢得抛硬币的人的反应导致个人道德责任衡量指标无法预测道德行为。相反，两项研究的结果都为道德伪善提供了更多证据。
