Li Hao-Ming, Yan Wen-Jing, Wu Yu-Wei, Huang Zi-Ye
Wenzhou Seventh People's Hospital, Wenzhou, China.
School of Mental Health, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.
Front Psychol. 2024 Mar 14;15:1271916. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1271916. eCollection 2024.
This study investigated the role of cognitive control in moral decision-making, focusing on conflicts between financial temptations and the integrity of honesty. We employed a perceptual task by asking participants to identify which side of the diagonal contained more red dots within a square to provoke both honest and dishonest behaviors, tracking their reaction times (RTs). Participants encountered situations with no conflict, ambiguous conflict, and clear conflict. Their behaviors in the clear conflict condition categorized them as either "honest" or "dishonest." Our findings suggested that, in ambiguous conflict situations, honest individuals had significantly longer RTs and fewer self-interest responses than their dishonest counterparts, suggesting a greater need for cognitive control to resolve conflicts and a lesser tendency toward self-interest. Moreover, a negative correlation was found between participants' number of self-interest responses and RTs in ambiguous conflict situations ( = -0.27 in study 1 and = -0.66 in study 2), and a positive correlation with cheating numbers in clear conflict situations ( = 0.36 in study 1 and = 0.82 in study 2). This suggests less cognitive control was required for self-interest and cheating responses, bolstering the "Will" hypothesis. We also found that a person's self-interest tendency could predict their dishonest behavior. These insights extend our understanding of the role of cognitive control plays in honesty and dishonesty, with potential applications in education, policy-making, and business ethics.
本研究调查了认知控制在道德决策中的作用，重点关注财务诱惑与诚实正直之间的冲突。我们采用了一项感知任务，要求参与者识别正方形对角线的哪一侧包含更多红点，以引发诚实和不诚实行为，并记录他们的反应时间（RTs）。参与者遇到了无冲突、模糊冲突和明确冲突的情况。他们在明确冲突条件下的行为将他们归类为“诚实”或“不诚实”。我们的研究结果表明，在模糊冲突情况下，诚实的个体比不诚实的个体有显著更长的反应时间和更少的自利反应，这表明解决冲突对认知控制的需求更大，而自利倾向更小。此外，在模糊冲突情况下，参与者的自利反应数量与反应时间之间存在负相关（研究1中r = -0.27，研究2中r = -0.66），在明确冲突情况下与作弊数量存在正相关（研究1中r = 0.36，研究2中r = 0.82）。这表明自利和作弊反应所需的认知控制较少，支持了“意志”假说。我们还发现，一个人的自利倾向可以预测他们的不诚实行为。这些见解扩展了我们对认知控制在诚实和不诚实中所起作用的理解，在教育、政策制定和商业道德方面具有潜在应用。
