Taylor Cat, Webb Thomas L, Sheeran Paschal
University of Sheffield, UK.
Br J Soc Psychol. 2014 Sep;53(3):501-20. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12043. Epub 2013 Jul 15.
The present research explores how justifications for indulgence influence the translation of 'good' intentions into action. Three studies investigated the nature of such justifications and their relation to indulgence. Study 1 identified six ways that people justify indulgence to themselves - that they are deserving or curious, that the indulgence is an exception to the norm or can be compensated for later, or that the tempting food is available or irresistible. Study 2 showed that the use of justifications undermined participants' strong (but not weak) intentions to halve their consumption of a nominated high-fat food. Study 3 found that priming the use of justifications increased the amount of chocolate that participants consumed in a subsequent, ostensibly unrelated, taste test. Again, justification use had a greater effect on participants with strong intentions to limit indulgence. Taken together, the studies suggest a new approach to understanding intention-behaviour discrepancies.
本研究探讨了放纵的理由如何影响“好”意图转化为行动。三项研究调查了此类理由的本质及其与放纵的关系。研究1确定了人们为自己的放纵行为进行辩解的六种方式——他们应得或好奇，放纵是常态的例外或可以在以后得到补偿，或者诱人的食物随手可得或无法抗拒。研究2表明，使用辩解理由削弱了参与者将指定高脂肪食物摄入量减半的强烈（而非微弱）意图。研究3发现，启动辩解理由的使用增加了参与者在随后一个表面上无关的味觉测试中食用巧克力的量。同样，使用辩解理由对有强烈限制放纵意图的参与者影响更大。综合来看，这些研究提出了一种理解意图与行为差异的新方法。
