Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Cogn Emot. 2013;27(4):707-22. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2012.736859. Epub 2012 Oct 25.
Anger may be more responsive than disgust to mitigating circumstances in judgements of wrongdoing. We tested this hypothesis in two studies where we had participants envision circumstances that could serve to mitigate an otherwise wrongful act. In Study 1, participants provided moral judgements, and ratings of anger and disgust, to a number of transgressions involving either harm or bodily purity. They were then asked to imagine and report whether there might be any circumstances that would make it all right to perform the act. Across transgression type, and controlling for covariance between anger and disgust, levels of anger were found to negatively predict the envisioning of mitigating circumstances for wrongdoing, while disgust was unrelated. Study 2 replicated and extended these findings to less serious transgressions, using a continuous measure of mitigating circumstances, and demonstrated the impact of anger independent of deontological commitments. These findings highlight the differential relationship that anger and disgust have with the ability to envision mitigating factors.
愤怒可能比厌恶更能对判断错误的减轻情节做出反应。我们在两项研究中检验了这一假设，让参与者设想一些可以减轻原本错误行为的情节。在研究 1 中，参与者对涉及伤害或身体纯洁的一系列冒犯行为进行了道德判断、愤怒和厌恶程度的评价，然后要求他们想象并报告是否存在任何可以使行为变得正当的情况。跨冒犯类型，且控制愤怒和厌恶之间的协方差，愤怒水平被发现对错误行为的减轻情节的设想有负面影响，而厌恶则没有关系。研究 2 使用减轻情节的连续衡量标准，复制并扩展了这些发现，适用于不那么严重的冒犯行为，并证明了愤怒的影响独立于道义承诺。这些发现强调了愤怒和厌恶与设想减轻因素的能力之间的差异关系。
