• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

不容忍越轨抗议行为:义务论和功利主义道德的差异作用。

Intolerance of Transgressive Protest Actions: The Differential Roles of Deontological and Utilitarian Morality.

机构信息

Utrecht University, The Netherlands.

University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.

出版信息

Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2023 Aug;49(8):1184-1196. doi: 10.1177/01461672221099709. Epub 2022 May 31.

DOI:10.1177/01461672221099709
PMID:35638641
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10320703/
Abstract

The current research examines intolerance of protest actions by focusing on two major questions: (a) How intolerant are people of transgressive protest actions of their least-liked versus most-liked groups? and (b) how do individual differences in deontological and utilitarian moral predisposition relate to intolerance of transgressive protest actions by these two groups? In two survey-embedded experiments using nationally representative samples from two West European countries (Germany, Netherlands), we found that people were overwhelmingly intolerant of morally transgressive protest actions by both their most-liked and least-liked groups, although slightly less so for the former. In addition, deontological moral predisposition was related to increased intolerance of protest actions regardless of whether it was committed by a most-liked or least-liked group. Individual difference in utilitarian moral predisposition was related to increased acceptance of protest actions regardless of group, but especially when the actions were perceived as serving the greater good.

摘要

当前的研究通过关注两个主要问题来考察对抗议行动的不容忍

(a)人们对自己最不喜欢和最喜欢的群体的越轨抗议行动有多不容忍?(b)道义和功利道德倾向的个体差异如何与对这两个群体的越轨抗议行动的不容忍有关?在两个使用来自两个西欧国家(德国、荷兰)的全国代表性样本的调查嵌入式实验中,我们发现,人们对自己最喜欢和最不喜欢的群体的道德越轨抗议行动都非常不容忍,尽管对前者的容忍度略低一些。此外,无论抗议行动是由最喜欢的群体还是最不喜欢的群体实施,道义道德倾向都与不容忍抗议行动的增加有关。功利道德倾向的个体差异与对抗议行动的接受程度有关,无论群体如何,尤其是当这些行动被视为服务于更大的利益时。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/506c/10320703/81340b22efbe/10.1177_01461672221099709-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/506c/10320703/81340b22efbe/10.1177_01461672221099709-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/506c/10320703/81340b22efbe/10.1177_01461672221099709-fig1.jpg

相似文献

1
Intolerance of Transgressive Protest Actions: The Differential Roles of Deontological and Utilitarian Morality.不容忍越轨抗议行为:义务论和功利主义道德的差异作用。
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2023 Aug;49(8):1184-1196. doi: 10.1177/01461672221099709. Epub 2022 May 31.
2
Deontological and utilitarian inclinations in moral decision making: a process dissociation approach.道德决策中的道义论和功利主义倾向:一种过程分离方法。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013 Feb;104(2):216-35. doi: 10.1037/a0031021. Epub 2012 Dec 31.
3
Sacrificial utilitarian judgments do reflect concern for the greater good: Clarification via process dissociation and the judgments of philosophers.牺牲功利主义判断确实反映了对更大利益的关注:通过过程分离和哲学家的判断进行澄清。
Cognition. 2018 Oct;179:241-265. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.04.018. Epub 2018 Jul 2.
4
Contingencies of self-worth and the strength of deontological and utilitarian inclinations.自我价值的偶然性与道义论和功利主义倾向的强度。
J Soc Psychol. 2021 Nov 2;161(6):664-682. doi: 10.1080/00224545.2020.1860882. Epub 2020 Dec 24.
5
Sidetracked by trolleys: Why sacrificial moral dilemmas tell us little (or nothing) about utilitarian judgment.被手推车带偏:为什么牺牲性道德困境对功利主义判断的揭示甚少(或毫无揭示)。
Soc Neurosci. 2015;10(5):551-60. doi: 10.1080/17470919.2015.1023400. Epub 2015 Mar 20.
6
Not all who ponder count costs: Arithmetic reflection predicts utilitarian tendencies, but logical reflection predicts both deontological and utilitarian tendencies.并非所有思考的人都会考虑成本:算术反思预测功利主义倾向,但逻辑反思预测了义务论和功利主义倾向。
Cognition. 2019 Nov;192:103995. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.06.007. Epub 2019 Jul 10.
7
At the heart of morality lies neuro-visceral integration: lower cardiac vagal tone predicts utilitarian moral judgment.道德的核心在于神经-内脏整合:较低的心脏迷走神经张力预示着功利主义道德判断。
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2016 Oct;11(10):1588-96. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsw077. Epub 2016 Jun 17.
8
Gender differences in responses to moral dilemmas: a process dissociation analysis.对道德困境反应中的性别差异:过程分离分析
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2015 May;41(5):696-713. doi: 10.1177/0146167215575731.
9
An Asymmetric Effect: Physical and Simulated Confederate's Mere Presence Induce a Preference for Deontological Over Utilitarian Judgment.一种非对称效应:物理存在和模拟的南方邦联诱导出对义务论判断而非功利主义判断的偏好。
Psychol Rep. 2023 Oct;126(5):2446-2464. doi: 10.1177/00332941221087908. Epub 2022 Apr 15.
10
Are thoughtful people more utilitarian? CRT as a unique predictor of moral minimalism in the dilemmatic context.深思熟虑的人更功利主义吗?认知反思测验作为两难情境中道德极简主义的独特预测指标。
Cogn Sci. 2015 Mar;39(2):325-52. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12136. Epub 2014 Jun 27.

本文引用的文献

1
Distinguishing Active and Passive Outgroup Tolerance: Understanding Its Prevalence and the Role of Moral Concern.区分主动和被动的外群体宽容:了解其普遍性及道德关怀的作用。
Polit Psychol. 2022 Aug;43(4):731-750. doi: 10.1111/pops.12790. Epub 2021 Nov 12.
2
Moralization and moral trade-offs explain (in)tolerance of Muslim minority behaviours.道德教化与道德权衡解释了对穆斯林少数群体行为的(不)容忍。
Eur J Soc Psychol. 2021 Oct;51(6):924-935. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2792. Epub 2021 Dec 14.
3
Promises and Perils of Experimentation: The Mutual-Internal-Validity Problem.
实验的承诺与风险:相互内部效度问题。
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2021 Jul;16(4):854-863. doi: 10.1177/1745691620974773. Epub 2021 Feb 16.
4
The Psychology of Moral Conviction.道德信念的心理学。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2021 Jan 4;72:347-366. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-063020-030612. Epub 2020 Sep 4.
5
Disrupting the system constructively: Testing the effectiveness of nonnormative nonviolent collective action.建设性地打破体制:测试非规范性非暴力集体行动的效果。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2021 Oct;121(4):819-841. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000333. Epub 2020 Aug 13.
6
Accepting Muslim minority practices: A case of discriminatory or normative intolerance?接受穆斯林少数群体的习俗:是歧视性不容忍还是规范性不容忍的案例?
J Community Appl Soc Psychol. 2020 Jul-Aug;30(4):405-418. doi: 10.1002/casp.2450. Epub 2020 Jan 16.
7
The activist's dilemma: Extreme protest actions reduce popular support for social movements.激进主义者的困境:极端抗议行动会减少公众对社会运动的支持。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2020 Nov;119(5):1086-1111. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000230. Epub 2020 Jan 13.
8
Reasoning supports utilitarian resolutions to moral dilemmas across diverse measures.推理支持功利主义的解决方案,以解决各种道德困境。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2021 Feb;120(2):443-460. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000281. Epub 2020 Jan 9.
9
Is Martin Luther King or Malcolm X the more acceptable face of protest? High-status groups' reactions to low-status groups' collective action.马丁·路德·金或马尔科姆·X,谁是更能被接受的抗议者形象?高地位群体对低地位群体集体行动的反应。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2020 May;118(5):919-944. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000195. Epub 2019 Jun 6.
10
Moralization in social networks and the emergence of violence during protests.社交网络中的道德化与抗议活动中的暴力行为的出现。
Nat Hum Behav. 2018 Jun;2(6):389-396. doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0353-0. Epub 2018 May 23.