Suppr超能文献

67 个国家的道德判断中的性别差异。

Sex differences in moral judgements across 67 countries.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Brain and Creativity Institute, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

出版信息

Proc Biol Sci. 2020 Oct 28;287(1937):20201201. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2020.1201. Epub 2020 Oct 21.

Abstract

Most of the empirical research on sex differences and cultural variations in morality has relied on within-culture analyses or small-scale cross-cultural data. To further broaden the scientific understanding of sex differences in morality, the current research relies on two international samples to provide the first large-scale examination of sex differences in moral judgements nested within cultures. Using a sample from 67 countries (Study 1; = 336 691), we found culturally variable sex differences in moral judgements, as conceptualized by Moral Foundations Theory. Women consistently scored higher than men on Care, Fairness, and Purity. By contrast, sex differences in Loyalty and Authority were negligible and highly variable across cultures. Country-level sex differences in moral judgements were also examined in relation to cultural, socioeconomic, and gender-equality indicators revealing that sex differences in moral judgements are larger in individualist, Western, and gender-equal societies. In Study 2 (19 countries; = 11 969), these results were largely replicated using Bayesian multi-level modelling in a distinct sample. The findings were robust when incorporating cultural non-independence of countries into the models. Specifically, women consistently showed higher concerns for Care, Fairness, and Purity in their moral judgements than did men. Sex differences in moral judgements were larger in individualist and gender-equal societies with more flexible social norms. We discuss the implications of these findings for the ongoing debate about the origin of sex differences and cultural variations in moral judgements as well as theoretical and pragmatic implications for moral and evolutionary psychology.

摘要

大多数关于性别差异和道德文化差异的实证研究都依赖于文化内分析或小规模的跨文化数据。为了进一步拓宽对道德性别差异的科学理解,本研究依赖于两个国际样本,对文化内的道德判断中的性别差异进行了首次大规模检验。使用来自 67 个国家的样本(研究 1;n = 336691),我们发现了道德基础理论所概念化的道德判断中的文化变量性别差异。女性在关怀、公平和纯洁方面的得分始终高于男性。相比之下,忠诚和权威的性别差异微不足道,并且在文化之间高度可变。还研究了国家层面的道德判断性别差异与文化、社会经济和性别平等指标之间的关系,结果表明,在个人主义、西方和性别平等的社会中,道德判断的性别差异更大。在研究 2(19 个国家;n = 11969)中,使用贝叶斯多层次模型在另一个独立样本中进行了广泛的复制。当将国家的文化非独立性纳入模型时,结果是稳健的。具体而言,女性在道德判断中对关怀、公平和纯洁的关注始终高于男性。在个人主义和性别平等的社会中,以及社会规范更灵活的社会中,道德判断的性别差异更大。我们讨论了这些发现对关于性别差异和道德判断文化差异的起源的持续争论以及对道德和进化心理学的理论和实践意义。

相似文献

1
Sex differences in moral judgements across 67 countries.
Proc Biol Sci. 2020 Oct 28;287(1937):20201201. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2020.1201. Epub 2020 Oct 21.
2
Moral foundations theory in autism spectrum disorder: A qualitative investigation.
Autism. 2020 Nov;24(8):2202-2212. doi: 10.1177/1362361320939331. Epub 2020 Jul 15.
4
Moral foundations in autistic people and people with systemizing minds.
Mol Autism. 2024 May 14;15(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s13229-024-00591-8.
5
Individual differences in moral development: the relation of sex, gender, and personality to morality.
J Pers. 1985 Jun;53(2):306-34. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1985.tb00368.x.
6
Moral foundations and political attitudes: The moderating role of political sophistication.
Int J Psychol. 2016 Aug;51(4):252-60. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12158. Epub 2015 Feb 26.
7
Mapping the moral domain.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Aug;101(2):366-85. doi: 10.1037/a0021847.
8
Morality beyond the WEIRD: How the nomological network of morality varies across cultures.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2023 Nov;125(5):1157-1188. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000470. Epub 2023 Aug 17.
9
Are some cultures more mind-minded in their moral judgements than others?
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2021 Nov 22;376(1838):20200288. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0288. Epub 2021 Oct 4.
10
Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2009 May;96(5):1029-46. doi: 10.1037/a0015141.

引用本文的文献

1
Do Social Relationships Influence Moral Judgment? A Cross-Cultural Examination.
Behav Sci (Basel). 2025 Aug 12;15(8):1097. doi: 10.3390/bs15081097.
2
Ethics trumps resources in women's and men's evaluations of potential mates and competitors.
Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 2;15(1):22597. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-06611-8.
3
Acute lorazepam administration does not significantly affect moral attitudes or judgments.
Sci Rep. 2025 May 8;15(1):16108. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-01109-9.
4
Higher education students' perceptions of ChatGPT: A global study of early reactions.
PLoS One. 2025 Feb 5;20(2):e0315011. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315011. eCollection 2025.
6
Different judgment frameworks for moral compliance and moral violation.
Sci Rep. 2024 Jul 16;14(1):16432. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-66862-9.
8
An analytical framework for studying attitude towards emotional AI: The three-pronged approach.
MethodsX. 2023 Mar 29;10:102149. doi: 10.1016/j.mex.2023.102149. eCollection 2023.
9
The paucity of morality in everyday talk.
Sci Rep. 2023 Apr 12;13(1):5967. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-32711-4.
10
Interpretations and revenge goals in response to peer provocations: Comparing adolescents in the United States and Pakistan.
Int J Behav Dev. 2022 Nov;46(6):555-561. doi: 10.1177/01650254221121840. Epub 2022 Sep 7.

本文引用的文献

2
Sex Differences in Mate Preferences Across 45 Countries: A Large-Scale Replication.
Psychol Sci. 2020 Apr;31(4):408-423. doi: 10.1177/0956797620904154. Epub 2020 Mar 20.
3
Recommendations for Increasing the Transparency of Analysis of Preexisting Data Sets.
Adv Methods Pract Psychol Sci. 2019 Sep;2(3):214-227. doi: 10.1177/2515245919848684. Epub 2019 Jun 11.
5
Ecological Sex Ratios and Human Mating.
Trends Cogn Sci. 2020 Feb;24(2):98-100. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2019.11.008. Epub 2019 Dec 28.
8
Sex differences in political leadership in an egalitarian society.
Evol Hum Behav. 2018 Jul;39(4):402-411. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.03.005. Epub 2018 Mar 10.
9
The Socio-Moral Image Database (SMID): A novel stimulus set for the study of social, moral and affective processes.
PLoS One. 2018 Jan 24;13(1):e0190954. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190954. eCollection 2018.
10
Humans as a model species for sexual selection research.
Proc Biol Sci. 2017 Nov 15;284(1866). doi: 10.1098/rspb.2017.1320.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验