Mullet Etienne, Rivière Sheila, Sastre María Teresa Muñoz
Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes.
Am J Psychol. 2007 Spring;120(1):25-46.
Experiment 1 compared the cognitive processes involved in blame and forgiveness judgments under identical experimental conditions. Experiment 2 was a replication of Experiment 1 with 4 judgment scales: willingness to prosecute, willingness to avenge, resentment level, and willingness to make up. Participants were presented with 32 scenarios in which a doctor made a medical error. These situations contained 5 items: the degree of proximity with the doctor (e.g., a family doctor known since childhood), the degree of negligence, the severity of consequences, apologies or contrition, and cancellation of consequences. Functional cognitive analysis grouped judgments into 2 categories: blame-like judgments (blame, prosecution, and revenge) and forgiveness-like judgments (resentment, forgiveness, and reconciliation). Blame-like judgments were characterized by additive integration rules, with negligence followed by apologies as the 2 main cues. Forgiveness-like judgments were characterized by an interactive integration rule, with apologies followed by negligence as the 2 main cues.
实验1在相同实验条件下比较了责备和宽恕判断中涉及的认知过程。实验2是对实验1的复制,使用了4种判断量表:起诉意愿、报复意愿、怨恨程度和和解意愿。向参与者呈现了32个医生犯医疗错误的场景。这些情况包含5个项目:与医生的亲近程度(例如,自幼相识的家庭医生)、疏忽程度、后果严重程度、道歉或悔悟,以及后果消除情况。功能性认知分析将判断分为两类:类似责备的判断(责备、起诉和报复)和类似宽恕的判断(怨恨、宽恕和和解)。类似责备的判断以累加整合规则为特征,疏忽后接道歉是两个主要线索。类似宽恕的判断以交互整合规则为特征,道歉后接疏忽是两个主要线索。