School of Psychology, Keynes College, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, United Kingdom.
Psychol Bull. 2013 Mar;139(2):328-51. doi: 10.1037/a0029319.
With the recent upswing in research interest on the moral implications of disgust, there has been uncertainty about what kind of situations elicit moral disgust and whether disgust is a rational or irrational player in moral decision making. We first outline the benefits of distinguishing between bodily violations (e.g., sexual taboos, such as pedophilia and incest) and nonbodily violations (e.g., deception or betrayal) when examining moral disgust. We review findings from our lab and others' showing that, although many existing studies do not control for anger when studying disgust, disgust at nonbodily violations is often associated with anger and hard to separate from it, while bodily violations more consistently predict disgust independently of anger. Building on this distinction, we present further empirical evidence that moral disgust, in the context of bodily violations, is a relatively primitively appraised moral emotion compared to others such as anger, and also that it is less flexible and less prone to external justifications. Our review and results underscore the need to distinguish between the different consequences of moral emotions.
随着对厌恶情绪的道德含义的研究兴趣的最近上升,人们对于什么情况下会引起道德厌恶,以及厌恶在道德决策中是理性还是非理性的参与者存在不确定性。我们首先概述了在研究道德厌恶时区分身体侵犯(例如,性禁忌,如恋童癖和乱伦)和非身体侵犯(例如,欺骗或背叛)的好处。我们回顾了我们实验室和其他人的研究结果,表明尽管许多现有研究在研究厌恶时没有控制愤怒,但对非身体侵犯的厌恶通常与愤怒有关,并且很难将其与愤怒区分开来,而身体侵犯更一致地预测了愤怒之外的厌恶。基于这种区分,我们提出了进一步的实证证据,表明在身体侵犯的情况下,道德厌恶是一种相对原始的道德情绪,与愤怒等情绪相比,道德厌恶的灵活性较低,也不太容易受到外部理由的影响。我们的综述和结果强调了区分不同道德情绪后果的必要性。