本文關(guān)鍵詞： 道德認同 自我肯定 評價標準 親社會行為　出處：《西南大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：人們普遍認為自己是道德的,當(dāng)這一觀點受到威脅時,人們可能會采取措施對抗威脅,以維系對自己的良好評價。盡管自我肯定理論(self-affirmation)和自我一致性理論(self-consistency)都認為人們會對自我概念進行維護,但是自我一致性理論強調(diào)行為與期望之間的關(guān)系,而自我肯定理論強調(diào)自我的完整性,因此在維護自我概念的方式上二者存在差異。自我一致性觀點認為要從引發(fā)人們自我不一致的具體問題入手,自我肯定理論認為從整體出發(fā)任何可以確定自我完整性的手段都是可行的,所以二者在親社會行為上的表現(xiàn)是截然不同的。那么,人們的親社會行為什么時候會出現(xiàn)自我一致性,什么時候會出現(xiàn)自我肯定呢?為了探討這一問題,本研究設(shè)計了2個實驗,分別從道德認同、自我肯定、評價標準角度研究自我肯定與自我一致性在親社會行為上的差異。實驗一選取251名被試,采用2(道德認同:高水平、低水平)×3(肯定領(lǐng)域:與道德相關(guān)、與道德不相關(guān)、不肯定)組間實驗設(shè)計,在實驗開始時通過行為啟動的方式對被試的道德自我進行威脅,之后對被試進行不同內(nèi)容的自我肯定(與道德相關(guān)或不相關(guān)),并測量被試的親社會行為,以此探討道德認同水平和自我肯定內(nèi)容差異對親社會行為的影響。實驗二選取172名被試,采用2(道德認同:高水平、低水平)×2(評價標準:個人、規(guī)范)組間實驗設(shè)計,在對被試進行道德自我威脅后,啟動他們的不同評價標準(個人或規(guī)范),以此探討個體道德認同水平和評價標準差異對親社會行為的影響。通過以上實驗探討自我肯定和自我一致性對親社會行為的不同影響,厘清道德認同對親社會行為的調(diào)節(jié)作用。通過實驗研究,得到如下結(jié)果:(1)在經(jīng)歷自我威脅后,對道德特質(zhì)進行自我肯定的個體,高道德認同者比低道德認同者經(jīng)歷更多的失調(diào),并表現(xiàn)出更多的親社會行為(自我一致);但如果對非道德特質(zhì)進行自我肯定,高道德認同者比低道德認同者經(jīng)歷更少的失調(diào),并表現(xiàn)出更少的親社會行為(自我肯定);無自我肯定的個體,二者無顯著差異。(2)在經(jīng)歷自我威脅后,啟動個人評價標準,高道德認同者比低道德認同者經(jīng)歷更少的失調(diào),并會減少親社會行為(自我肯定);但啟動規(guī)范評價標準,二者無顯著差異。
[Abstract]:People generally think they are moral, and when this view is threatened, they may take measures to counter it. To maintain a good evaluation of oneself. (although self-affirmation theory and self-consistency theory). People are supposed to maintain their self-concept. But the theory of self-consistency emphasizes the relationship between behavior and expectation, while the theory of self-affirmation emphasizes the integrity of self. Therefore, there are differences in the ways of maintaining self-concept. The self-consistency point of view should start with the specific problems that lead to the self-inconsistency of people. Self-affirmation theory holds that any means to determine self-integrity from the whole is feasible, so the performance of the two in pro-social behavior is very different. When will self-consistency and self-affirmation occur in people's pro-social behavior? In order to explore this problem, this study designed two experiments, respectively from the moral identity, self-affirmation. The difference between self-affirmation and self-consistency in pro-social behavior was studied from the perspective of evaluation criteria. In experiment one, 251 subjects were selected and used 2 (moral identity: high level). Low level) 脳 3 (positive field: moral related, not moral related, uncertain) design, at the beginning of the experiment through the behavior of the way to start to threaten the moral self of the participants. The subjects were then given different self-affirmation (moral related or irrelevant) and their pro-social behaviors were measured. The second experiment selected 172 subjects and used 2 (moral identity: high level, low level) 脳 2 (evaluation criteria: individual). The design of the inter-group experiment was designed to initiate different evaluation criteria (individual or standard) after the subjects were subjected to moral self-threats. In order to explore the level of individual moral identity and evaluation criteria for the impact of pro-social behavior. Through the above experiments to explore the self-affirmation and self-consistency on the different impact of pro-social behavior. Through the experimental study, we get the following results: 1) after experiencing the self-threat, the self-affirmation of the moral characteristics of the individual. Those with high moral identity experienced more disorders than those with low moral identity and showed more pro-social behaviors (self-consistency); But if the self-affirmation of non-moral traits, the high-moral identity experienced less disorder than the low-moral identity, and showed less pro-social behavior (self-affirmation; There was no significant difference between the two individuals without self-affirmation. 2) after experiencing self-threat, the individual evaluation criteria were activated, and the high moral identity experienced less disorder than the low moral identity. And will reduce pro-social behavior (self-affirmation); But there is no significant difference between them.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：B848

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 殷融;葉浩生;;道德概念的黑白隱喻表征及其對道德認知的影響[J];心理學(xué)報;2014年09期

2 張宏偉;李曄;;兩種道德自我調(diào)節(jié)機制下的道德行為[J];心理科學(xué)進展;2014年07期

3 潘孝富;王昭靜;高飛;徐瑩;;辛苦所得與意外所得的非理性消費偏差:基于IAT檢測和ERP證據(jù)[J];心理科學(xué)進展;2014年04期

4 李谷;周暉;丁如一;;道德自我調(diào)節(jié)對親社會行為和違規(guī)行為的影響[J];心理學(xué)報;2013年06期

5 王興超;楊繼平;劉麗;高玲;李霞;;道德推脫對大學(xué)生攻擊行為的影響:道德認同的調(diào)節(jié)作用[J];心理發(fā)展與教育;2012年05期

6 石偉;劉杰;;自我肯定研究述評[J];心理科學(xué)進展;2009年06期

7 蔣玉娜;金盛華;;大學(xué)生人格評定的和諧追求——200個人格詞匯喜好度中美對比研究[J];心理科學(xué);2009年03期

8 李愛梅;凌文輇;;心理賬戶:理論與應(yīng)用啟示[J];心理科學(xué)進展;2007年05期

9 寇_g;洪慧芳;譚晨;李磊;;青少年親社會傾向量表的修訂[J];心理發(fā)展與教育;2007年01期

10 溫忠麟,侯杰泰,張雷;調(diào)節(jié)效應(yīng)與中介效應(yīng)的比較和應(yīng)用[J];心理學(xué)報;2005年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 張宏偉;一致還是波動？過去的道德行為對未來的道德行為的影響：道德認同的調(diào)節(jié)作用[D];華中師范大學(xué);2015年

2 劉杰;自我肯定降低防御反應(yīng)的實驗研究[D];西南大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號：1466886