Universität Mannheim, Germany.
Universität Mannheim, Germany; Universität Koblenz-Landau, Germany.
Cognition. 2020 Mar;196:104156. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104156. Epub 2020 Jan 22.
Processing fluency-the subjective ease of information processing-influences a variety of judgments (e.g., judgments of familiarity, liking, and truth). A study by Laham, Alter, and Goodwin (2009) suggests that this is also true for moral judgments. More specifically, the authors found that discrepant perceptual fluency mitigates moral wrongness ratings. In five studies (total N = 694), we tested the replicability of this finding for different kinds of scenarios (moral versus conventional transgressions) and different perceptual fluency manipulations. In Studies 1a and 1b we manipulated fluency by text background, in Studies 2a and 2b by font type, and in Study 3 by word spaces. Critically, none of the studies replicated Laham et al.'s discrepant fluency effect on moral wrongness ratings. In turn, we found that moral wrongness ratings were strongly affected by participants' emotional responses to the scenarios. Taken together, the findings of our five studies cast very strong doubt on perceptual fluency effects on moral judgments.
加工流畅度——信息处理的主观容易程度——影响各种判断（例如熟悉度、喜好和真实性的判断）。拉汉姆、奥尔特和古德温（2009 年）的一项研究表明，这对于道德判断也是如此。更具体地说，作者发现，不同的感知流畅度减轻了道德错误的评价。在五项研究（共 694 人）中，我们测试了这种发现对于不同类型的场景（道德与常规违规）和不同的感知流畅度操作的可复制性。在研究 1a 和 1b 中，我们通过文本背景来操纵流畅度，在研究 2a 和 2b 中通过字体类型来操纵流畅度，在研究 3 中通过单词间距来操纵流畅度。关键的是，拉汉姆等人的关于道德错误评价的不一致流畅度效应在任何一项研究中都没有得到复制。反过来，我们发现，道德错误评价受到参与者对场景的情绪反应的强烈影响。总之，我们的五项研究结果强烈怀疑感知流畅度对道德判断的影响。
