Kreps Tamar A, Monin Benoît
Stanford University, USA
Stanford University, USA.
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2014 Nov;40(11):1529-42. doi: 10.1177/0146167214551154. Epub 2014 Sep 24.
When a speaker presents an opinion, an important factor in audiences' reactions is whether the speaker seems to be basing his or her decision on ethical (as opposed to more pragmatic) concerns. We argue that, despite a consequentialist philosophical tradition that views utilitarian consequences as the basis for moral reasoning, lay perceivers think that speakers using arguments based on consequences do not construe the issue as a moral one. Five experiments show that, for both political views (including real State of the Union quotations) and organizational policies, consequentialist views are seen to express less moralization than deontological views, and even sometimes than views presented with no explicit justification. We also demonstrate that perceived moralization in turn affects speakers' perceived commitment to the issue and authenticity. These findings shed light on lay conceptions of morality and have practical implications for people considering how to express moral opinions publicly.
当演讲者表达一种观点时，听众反应的一个重要因素是演讲者是否似乎是基于道德（而非更注重实际的）考量来做出其决定。我们认为，尽管存在一种将功利主义后果视为道德推理基础的结果主义哲学传统，但普通感知者认为，使用基于后果的论据的演讲者并不将该问题视为一个道德问题。五项实验表明，对于政治观点（包括实际的国情咨文引用）和组织政策而言，结果主义观点被认为比义务论观点表达的道德化程度更低，甚至有时比没有明确理由的观点表达的道德化程度还低。我们还证明，感知到的道德化反过来会影响演讲者在该问题上的感知承诺和真实性。这些发现揭示了普通人对道德的观念，并对那些考虑如何公开表达道德观点的人具有实际意义。
