ISSN 1671-3710
CN 11-4766/R
主办：中国科学院心理研究所
出版：科学出版社

心理科学进展, 2018, 26(11): 2081-2090 doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.02081

研究前沿

文化如何影响道德?文化间变异、文化内变异与多元文化的视角

胡晓檬1, 喻丰2, 彭凯平,1

1 清华大学社会科学学院心理学系, 北京 100084

2 西安交通大学人文社会科学学院, 西安 710049

How does culture affect morality? The perspectives of between-culture variations, within-culture variations, and multiculturalism

HU Xiaomeng1, YU Feng2, PENG Kaiping,1

1 Department of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China

2 School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, China;

通讯作者: 彭凯平 E-mail:pengkp@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn

收稿日期: 2017-10-17   网络出版日期: 2018-11-15

基金资助: * 国家自然科学基金面上项目(31471001)

Received: 2017-10-17   Online: 2018-11-15

摘要

道德判断与行为具有高度的文化敏感性, 来自不同文化背景、具有不同文化经历的个体, 对于同一道德现象的理解与建构存在显著差异。随着20世纪80年代文化心理学的复兴繁荣和全球化进程的不断深化, 文化视角的道德心理学在当代社会心理学语境中备受关注, 并已开展了初步的理论探索, 积累了大量的实证证据。基于文化心理学的视角, 本文将分别从文化间变异、文化内变异和多元文化三个方面梳理和评述不同文化因素(比如地域、生态、社会阶层等)如何影响个体的道德判断与行为, 期望推动未来研究进一步探索快速而剧烈的文化变迁背景下中国人的道德心理和价值体系已经发生了或正在发生着怎样的演变过程。

关键词： 道德判断与行为; 文化变异; 多元文化经历

Abstract

Moral judgments and behaviors are highly sensitive to culture. The understanding and construction of the exact same moral issues can vary substantially across individuals who come from different cultural backgrounds or possess different levels of multicultural experiences. Social psychologists are increasingly interested in closely looking at human morality through the lens of culture, partly driven by a renaissance of cultural psychology in the 1980s and the broadening and deepening of globalization. Based upon the perspective of cultural psychology, we briefly summarize how particular cultural factors (e.g. geography, ecology, social class) influence individuals’ moral judgments and behaviors from three facets: between-culture variations, within-culture variations, and multiculturalism. Together, it is our hope that this review article will inspire future research to better understand how Chinese people’s moral patterns and value systems have changed and are changing in the context of rapid and deep cultural change in China.

Keywords： moral judgments and behaviors; cultural variations; multicultural experiences

PDF (514KB) 元数据 多维度评价 相关文章 导出 EndNote| Ris| Bibtex  收藏本文

本文引用格式

胡晓檬, 喻丰, 彭凯平. 文化如何影响道德?文化间变异、文化内变异与多元文化的视角. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(11): 2081-2090 doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.02081

HU Xiaomeng, YU Feng, PENG Kaiping. How does culture affect morality? The perspectives of between-culture variations, within-culture variations, and multiculturalism. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(11): 2081-2090 doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.02081

1 引言

当下国人正生活在一个千年未有之大变局的时代。自改革开放以来的四十年里, 中国社会经历了翻天覆地的快速变革。中国人民所经历的社会文化变迁, 是世界范围内最为深刻的文化变迁之一。在这个过程中, 中国社会诞生了光怪陆离、千奇百怪的社会文化现象, 比如文化反哺、单身贵族、网络流行语、道德滑坡等等。其中, 道德议题是人类亘古不变所追寻的话题, 也是社会科学家以及当代社会心理学家长期探究的热点问题。自20世纪80年代始, 文化心理学的复苏与繁荣、全球化进程中不同文明的碰撞与交融、以及现实世界中道德冲突不断凸显等多方因素, 共同促使文化视角的道德心理学成为社会心理学话语体系中发展迅速、非常活跃的研究领域。前沿新颖的理论取向、推陈出新的研究范式以及不同思想流派之间的学术争论, 促使多个学科的研究者从不同视角、方法、分析水平等对人类的道德议题展开了大量跨学科交叉性的实证探索(Haidt, 2007)。遗憾的是, 尽管道德心理学在西方社会已经积累了丰富的理论成果和实证依据(Haidt, 2007), 然而基于中国文化背景下的道德心理学, 无论是理论探索还是实证积累仍处于初级阶段。当下的中国人正生活在社会转型期和文化变迁时代, 日常生活中层出不穷、令人深省的道德现象, 亟需道德心理学研究者基于中国伦理学思想宝库, 深入开展理论探索、大量积累实证依据, 最终能够建构出适用于描述和解释中国人独特的道德判断与行为的理论体系。比如, 在內隐论层面上, 中国人如何理解和建构“道德”和“不道德”等基本概念; 文化变迁导致了哪些方面出现道德爬坡、哪些方面出现道德滑坡; 心理传统性和心理现代性皆高的双文化个体如何在不同文化情境中进行文化框架转换; 不同文化情境所蕴含的文化规范如何促使人们在道德两难中做出优先选择和道德权衡等。

文化心理学家认为, 道德心理并不是产生在文化真空之中, 个体的心理活动会受到多种文化形式的复合影响, 比如国籍、民族、宗教、性别、社会经济地位等(Cohen, 2009)。从文化的视角研究道德问题, 有助于研究者更好地理解不同文化背景下的个体, 在道德信念、道德认知、道德情绪、道德推理、道德行为等方面存在怎样的文化差异, 描绘出人类道德多样性的图景, 并揭示其潜在的心理机制, 从而在实践层面上有助于减少由于道德误解而产生的偏见和冲突。另外, 关于文化与心理之间关系的探究, 从20世纪80年代主要关心和探讨不同文化维度如何描述和解释文化差异(比如个体主义和集体主义、独立自我与依存自我), 逐步演变为考察文化与心理如何互相塑造、互相影响的动态过程(Hong, 2009; Hong, Morris, Chiu, & Benet-martínez, 2000; Lehman, Chiu, & Schaller, 2004; Oyserman & Sorensen, 2009; Morris, Chiu, & Liu, 2015)。因此, 道德心理学家也开始更加关注文化与道德如何互相动态建构, 以及全球化所带来的多元文化体验如何重塑人们原有的价值体系等问题。本文将聚焦文化取向的道德心理学, 从文化间变异(between-culture variations)、文化内变异(within-culture variations)与多元文化(multiculturalism) 三个面向来梳理和评述文化因素究竟如何影响个体的道德心理过程。

2 道德心理的文化间变异

大量的心理学证据表明, 个体的道德判断与行为存在显著的文化差异。前人研究所涉及的文化变量多种多样, 其中包括宗教信仰、生态因素、规范性社会机构(Graham, Meindl, Beall, Johnson, & Zhang, 2016)、文化观念、种族认同、社会阶层、政治倾向、性别认同等等(Cohen & Rozin, 2001; Graham et al., 2016; Haidt, 2007, Miller & Bersoff, 1994; Shweder & Haidt, 1993)。本部分我们将从文化间变异的角度来概述个体的道德信念、道德判断与道德行为等存在怎样的文化差异。

2.1 地域文化差异

社会心理学家认为西方人更加强调基于权利的道德(right-based morality), 注重个体与生俱来的权益(比如机会平等), 而东方人更加侧重基于义务的道德(duty-based morality), 看重个体对角色期望的满足和角色义务的履行(比如绵延子嗣) (Chiu, Dweck, Tong, & Fu, 1997; Miller & Bersoff, 1992; Shweder, Mahapatra, & Miller, 1987)。权利导向的西方文化认为, 在公共事务中投入资源和利益是个体的自发行为, 而义务导向的东方文化中, 为集体贡献个人力量甚至牺牲个人利益, 是文化规范所蕴含文化脚本的必要组成部分(Boer & Fischer, 2013)。

实证研究表明, 东方人和西方人在道德判断、道德情绪和道德行为方面确实存在实质的文化差异。首先, 基于道德心理学领域较为有影响力与解释力的道德基础理论(Moral Foundations Theory) (Graham, Nosek, Haidt, Iyer, Koleva, & Ditto, 2011; Graham et al., 2013; 张彦彦, 陈浩, 2009), 研究者发现, 东方人比西方人更加强调忠诚与圣洁这两个保护群体秩序的道德范畴(binding foundations), 而西方人更加注重关爱和公平这两个保障个体权益的道德范畴(individualizing foundations)。其次, 东方人与西方人对于“不道德”这一核心概念的定义与理解有所不同。西方人倾向于从是否包含“伤害”元素来判断和衡量“不道德”程度, 而东方人则更多将“不道德”与“不文明”紧密关联起来 (Buchtel et al., 2015)。再次, 同样做出不道德行为之后, 中国人更多表现出羞耻感(shame), 而西方人更多体验到罪恶感(guilt) (Bedford & Hwang, 2003)。最后, 当面对道德两难或道德冲突情境时, 人们的优先选择和应对策略存在显著的文化差异。例如, 当被试面临公正伦理(justice rule)与关系伦理(relation rule)的两难抉择时, 美国被试优先选择了公正伦理, 而印度被试则赋予了关系伦理更高的优先权(Miller & Bersoff, 1992)。当面临经典的火车难题(trolley problem)时, 相比英国人, 中国人更加不情愿支持牺牲一个人、拯救五个人的功利性道德决策(utilitarian moral decisions), 并且会更多考量自身是否适合担任该情境的干预者(Gold, Colmen, & Pulford, 2014)。

尽管个体的道德判断与行为模式存在显著的文化差异, 但是道德心理学家们在有意图的伤害(intentional harm)是不道德的这一点上存在一定的共识(Cushman, Sheketoff, Wharton, & Carey, 2013; Gray, Young, & Waytz, 2012; Haidt & Joseph, 2004; Piaget, 1932; Turiel, 1983; Young & Saxe, 2011)。然而文化人类学的研究发现, 某些文化存在美德暴力(virtuous violence) (Fiske & Rai, 2014)和荣誉杀戮(honor killing) (Reimers, 2007)等社会现象。联合国2000年的统计数据表明, 世界范围内出自维护荣誉动机而导致的谋杀行为多达5000起(Chesler, 2010)。例如, 在某些文化中, 如果一个未婚少女被不幸强奸了, 她的父亲或哥哥因为感知到整个家族或文化社群被深深地羞辱与亵渎而选择杀害这名少女, 而这一行为是被当地的道德规范所允许的。

2.2 生态文化差异

生态学取向是当前文化心理学的前沿方向之一(Wei, et al., 2017; Oishi, 2014; Oishi & Graham, 2010)。以农耕文化为主的中国社会赋予群体和谐、等级制度和个人品德更多的积极价值(Chen et al., 2016), 更加强调忠诚、权威及贞洁等道德品质(Graham et al., 2013), 一部分是因为这些道德规范有助于将社会成员团结起来强化“部落意识” (tribal consciousness), 以维持农耕文明所需要的大规模合作。实证研究发现, 在不同生态文化中成长的儿童, 其教养方式与文化环境的差异导致他们对于公平和公正的理解大相径庭。在西方现代文明环境中被培育长大的孩子, 认为基于个体的工作贡献与相对生产力来进行结果分配(merit- based)是理所当然的。然而在以狩猎-采集文化为主的非洲文化环境中成长起来的孩子, 则表现出更强的平等主义倾向(egalitarianism), 更认同绝对平等的分配方式(Schäfer, Haun, & Tomasello, 2015)。

不同文化所广泛采用的生产方式也会影响人们如何进行道德判断及其边界条件。通过将8个小规模、低工业化、较为传统的社会与2个大规模、高工业化与较为现代的社会进行比较, 研究者发现, 来自国际化大城市的被试在道德判断时呈现出较强的意图导向(intent-based moral judgment), 而来自原始部落的被试则呈现出较弱的意图导向, 并且会将道德行为后果纳入考量(Barrett et al., 2016)。另外, 来自不同文化体系的个体对不同形式的减轻情节(mitigating circumstance)赋予不同的效价和权重。具体而言, 对于同样的不道德行为, 如果存在事实误解(mistake of fact)或精神错乱(insanity)等减轻情节的情况, 在大规模、高度工业化的社会中生活的人们(比如洛杉矶等)会做出更加缓和的道德判断, 而在小规模、低工业化的社会中生活的人们(比如亚萨瓦群岛), 其道德判断的严重程度则不会受到影响 (Barrett et al., 2016)。

2.3 宗教文化差异

宗教文化同样深刻地影响人们的道德判断及行为(Cohen, 2015; Graham & Haidt, 2010; Shariff, Piazza, & Kramer, 2014)。以儒、释、道以及伊斯兰教为代表的东方宗教, 与以基督教、犹太教为代表的西方宗教对于道德议题的定义理解、话语体系和管理规范存在本质差异(Cohen, Wu, & Miller, 2016)。例如, 持有不同宗教信仰(或相比于无宗教信仰)的个体, 在进行道德判断时, 会赋予个人意图或行为后果不同的权重。基督教新教伦理更加谴责心灵犯罪, 认为在头脑中想象自己发生了婚外情和在现实生活中实施通奸行为同等严重, 而犹太教徒则同时注重个体是否在现实生活中实施了这一行为(Cohen et al., 2016; Graham et al., 2016)。另外, 无神论者与有神论者在亲社会行为、认知风格与元伦理方面也存在较大差异(Shariff et al., 2014)。心理学家对于宗教信仰所导致的道德心理差异提供了两种可能的解释：一种解释是基于形态各异的文化传播体系(Shariff, Willard, Andersen, & Norenzayan, 2016), 另一种解释是基于人们归属和认同的心理需求。具体而言, 不同的文化规范、文化信念与文化实践等促进了人们产生特殊的心理连结与亲密情感, 形成了超越宗教信念本身、团结一致的道德社区(moral community) (Graham & Haidt, 2010)。

3 道德心理的文化内变异

文化心理学家认为考察道德判断与行为的文化内变异同样富于思想洞见和理论意义。生活在同一地区、同类文化中的个体, 可能持有相左的心理特征与社会互动模式(Leung & Cohen, 2011; Talhelm et al., 2014; Yamawaki, 2012), 有时其差异程度甚至会超过文化间变异(Cohen, 2009; Graham et al., 2016; Vauclair & Fischer, 2011)。下面我们将从社会阶层和政治图谱两个角度来概述文化内部因素如何影响个体的道德心理过程。

3.1 社会阶层差异

社会阶层是心理学家描述和解释人类心理与行为差异的核心文化变量之一(Kraus, Piff, & Keltner, 2011; Stephens, Markus, & Townsend, 2007)。不同社会阶层中的个体, 在道德范畴的认知方式、情感体验、行为模式等方面均存在显著的文化差异。有趣的是, 多项实证研究得出的结论并不一致。研究发现, 高社会阶层的人比低社会阶层的人更倾向于做出功利主义道德决策(Côté, Piff, & Willer, 2013)、实施更多不道德行为(Piff, Stancato, Côté, Mendoza-Denton, & Keltner, 2012), 而低社会阶层的人更多表现出团结协作、慷慨分享、捐赠等行为, 并且更少撒谎、欺骗和破坏交通法则等(Piff, Kraus, Côté, Cheng, & Keltner, 2010)。然而, 后续研究发现, 当不道德行为的受益者是自己的时候, 高社会阶层的人通常出于个人利益最大化, 倾向于做出更多不道德行为, 而当不道德行为的受益者是他人的时候, 低社会阶层的人反而会出于善意助人的动机, 实施更多不道德行为(Dubois, Rucker, & Galinsky, 2015)。

通过进一步探索其内在心理机制, 研究者发现个人收入而非受教育水平能够更好预测社会阶层和不道德行为之间的关联, 权力感则部分中介了这一效应(Dubois et al., 2015)。这些实证依据对探究当下处于快速转型期的中国社会, 新近分化的社会阶层如何影响人们的道德心理模式具有借鉴价值。比如, 处于高社会经济地位和低社会经济地位的不同个体, 其道德观念、道德情绪和道德行为存在哪些显著差异, 是主观经济地位还是客观社会经济地位对个体的道德判断与行为具有更强的预测力和解释力, 中国特有的社会阶层结构、分化与流动、分层与固化会对个体的道德判断与行为产生何种影响, 这些影响所呈现的规律和模式与西方社会在多大程度上或者在哪些维度上相似还是迥异等。

3.2 政治认同差异

在当下的美国文化语境中, 由于人们的政治倾向不同而持续上演和升级的文化战争呈现出愈演愈烈的极化态势(Hunter, 1991; Haidt, 2016), 使得秉持不同政治认同的个体几乎生活在迥然不同的文化国度与精神世界之中(Janoff-Bulman, 2009)。社会心理学家认为, 自由主义者(political liberals)与保守主义者(political conservatives)之间存在思维方式、情感体验以及行为倾向等方面的心理与行为差异, 导致两个政治阵营中的人们, 对社会现实的感知、社会政策的解读、社会争议问题的应对策略等秉持几乎相反的观点。实证研究表明, 自由派人士更多采用分析性思维方式, 而保守派人士倾向于采用整体性思维方式(Talhelm et al., 2015; Nisbett, Peng, Choi, & Norenzayan, 2001)。在公共政策方面, 持有自由主义倾向的个体认为人们对堕胎、枪支控制、同性婚姻、合法使用大麻等拥有独立自由的选择权利, 而持有保守主义倾向的人们则坚决反对堕胎、排斥同性恋婚姻、非法移民等少数派群体, 强调新教资本主义工作伦理以及维持巩固家庭、社群、国家等传统体系和社会单元。道德心理学家认为, 这些政见差异可能是由于个体持有不同的道德矩阵(moral matrices)、侧重不同的道德模块所导致的。具体而言, 自由派人士非常重视提升个体权益的关爱与公平这两个道德范畴, 而保守派人士不但看重关爱和公平, 同时珍视保护群体秩序的内群体忠诚、权威等级及精神贞洁(Graham, Haidt, & Nosek, 2009)。这一基本发现在多个国家和文化地区得到了多项研究的佐证(Graham et al., 2013; Kim, Kang, & Yun, 2012; Nilsson & Erlansson, 2015; Yilmaz, Harma, Bahcekapili, & Cesur, 2016; Davies, Sibley, & Liu, 2014), 尽管在美国黑人群体中存在一些例外情况(Davis et al., 2016)。

4 多元文化经历对道德心理的影响

全球化进程的不断深化促进了不同文明之间更加频繁而深入的对话与交融。社会学家指出, 当今许多国家和地区皆在经历深刻的历史变革与文化变迁, 对人们的心理与行为产生了复杂而且看似矛盾的影响。一方面, 全球化导致了不同文化地区中的人们所秉持的价值观出现趋同态势, 比如中国人的个体主义倾向(Yu et al., 2016)和自恋程度(Cai, Kwan, & Sedikides, 2012)上升; 另一方面, 人们仍然受到文化特异的传统价值体系的持续影响(Inglehart & Baker, 2000), 比如印度的种姓制度和中国的孝道伦理。在这一背景下, 前人的理论框架与实证研究逐渐不能令人满意地描述和解释日新月异、复杂多元的道德心理现象。例如, 个体的道德观念与行为如何受到多元文化经历的动态影响、文化迁徙群体的道德心理过程发生了怎样的微妙变迁。幸运的是, 社会心理学家已经开始关注和探讨全球化背景下, 文化与道德如何相互影响与建构的问题。下面我们将从多元文化视角来概述有关这一提议的最新发现与初步证据, 尤其聚焦多元文化经历如何影响个体的道德心理过程。

近年来, 社会心理学家愈发关注全球化进程会给人们带来哪些社会心理影响(Gelfand, Lyons, & Lun, 2011; Marsella, 2012)。迄今为止, 全球化心理学的研究大多集中在以下几个方面：第一, 个体对全球化这一多维、动态、复杂的现象和过程持有何种内隐信念(Yang et al., 2011); 第二, 全球化进程对不同文化群体产生何种社会心理后果, 比如认同发展(Arnett, 2002); 第三, 区分基于移民动机的文化适应(immigration-based acculturation)和基于全球化过程的文化适应(globalization-based acculturation) (Chen, Benet-Martinez, & Bond, 2008); 第四, 全球化与心理学的复杂关联(Chiu & Kwan, 2016; Leung, Qiu, & Chiu, 2014); 第五, 如何更好的构建全球化心理学的理论体系(Chiu, Gries, Torelli, & Cheng, 2011; Leung et al., 2014; Marsella, 2012)。

在道德范畴中, 研究者考察了多元文化经历与道德判断的关系。结果发现, 拥有丰富多元文化经历的个体, 表现出更高水平的后习俗道德推理(post-conventional moral judgment), 其中一种可能的解释是多元文化经历的增加导致人们的文化敏感性提升, 因而在道德推理中能够更好的进行观点采择和更具同理心(Narvaez & Hill, 2010)。有趣的是, 尽管前人研究揭示了多元文化经历可能给人们带来诸多益处, 例如提升创造力和认知灵活度(Leung, Maddux, Galinsky, & Chiu, 2008; Lu, Hafenbrack, et al., 2017; Lu, Martin, Usova, & Galinsky, 2017)、广义信任程度(Cao, Galinsky, & Maddux, 2014)、减少群际偏见(Tadmor, Hong, Chao, Wiruchnipawan, & Wang, 2012), 但同时也可能提升道德相对主义信念(moral relativism), 从而增加撒谎和欺骗等不道德行为(Lu, Quoidbach, Gino, Chakroff, Maddux, & Galinsky, 2017)。这一研究领域尚处于初级探索阶段, 仍有很多开放和现实的道德问题等待心理学家的实证探索与理论构建, 比如多元文化经历的广度和深度究竟如何重塑个体的道德判断与行为模式, 何种文化心理构念能够更好的测量和捕捉多样化的多元文化经历, 从而更好的解释和预测个体的道德认知、情绪、意图和行为已经发生或者即将发生哪些微妙的变化等。

社会心理学家认为, 将与全球化进程有关的因素或维度与道德范畴的不同面向整合起来可能提供一条有价值的探索路径(Gelfand et al., 2011)。比如地域流动性(geographic mobility)、文化混搭(cultural mixing) (Chiu et al., 2011; Morris, Mok, & Mor, 2011)以及禁忌权衡(taboo tradeoffs) (Tetlock, Kristel, Elson, Greene, & Lerner, 2000)等现象是否影响人们侧重于保护个体道德或群体道德的偏好程度, 如何引发不同道德规则之间相互冲突或排斥。基于多个国家的样本, 研究者发现, 个体全球化经历的增加, 导致了群际边界的不断扩大, 并且促进了大规模人类合作行为(Buchan, Grimalda, Wilson, Brewer, Fatas, & Foddy, 2009)。这种趋势将有助于进一步提升人们对全球性问题(如全球变暖、极端贫困、恐怖主义等)的重视, 为提升人类公共福祉(如极端贫困、教育公平等)做出积极贡献。在应对策略方面, 研究者提出了“全球化取向” (global orientations)这一构念, 旨在捕捉人们对待全球化与多元文化融合的趋势所持有的心理策略存在的个体差异(Chen et al., 2016)。具体而言, 持有多元文化习得(multicultural acquisition)取向的个体, 通常更倾向于积极主动地学习外国语言、外来文化的知识和习俗等, 而持有民族文化保护(ethnic protection)取向的人, 通常更倾向于坚守自身母文化的生活方式、风俗习惯与价值体系等(Chen et al., 2016)。实证依据表明, 多元文化习得取向较高的个体, 更加强调关爱和公平等保障个体权益的道德价值, 而民族文化保护取向较高的个体, 则更为偏好忠诚、权威与圣洁等维持群体秩序的道德规范。这一基本发现在美国本土学生、中国本土学生以及在美中国留学生群体中得到了文化一致性的佐证(Hu, 2017)。总体而言, 上述结论与发现对探究全球化进程如何影响个体的道德心理过程提供了基础性的理论框架和初步的实证积累。全球化心理学和道德心理学的交叉与融合是一个值得挖掘和深入探索的研究领域。随着全球化进程不断深入、中国文化变迁不断深化, 人们拥有了更多的机会和资源在不同文化时空中穿梭迁移, 越来越多的中国人成为了双文化或多元文化个体。那么, 多元文化经历的广度与深度究竟如何影响个体的道德判断、重塑原有的价值体系, 其背后的心理机制如何, 这些心理机制是否具有文化差异, 存在哪些边界条件等, 都是值得未来研究者关注和探究的重要而有趣的社会心理学议题。

5 结语与展望

本文分别从文化间变异、文化内变异和多元文化三个角度归纳和评述了近年来文化心理学视域下道德心理学领域的最新进展和有趣发现, 为未来研究者开展全球化进程与中国文化变迁如何影响中国人的道德判断与行为提供参考框架和创新思路。同时, 本文指出了已有研究大多基于西方文化背景, 呼吁未来研究开展更多基于中国文化情境的实证探索和理论建构, 从而更好地描绘和解释14亿中国人的道德多样性和道德变迁现象。当前, 文化取向的道德心理学正在面临一定程度上的范式转移, 从原有的跨文化比较逐步演变为探究文化与道德之间如何动态建构、交互影响, 再到近年来提出的多元文化主义和文化会聚主义等新思潮和新观点(Morris et al., 2015)。

理论层面上, 文化视角的道德心理学挑战了西方文化语境所蕴含的内在假设, 比如个体主义和权利导向, 而且极大地丰富了道德范畴的内涵和外延, 比如超越伤害和公平议题, 更多关注集体主义文化所侧重的忠诚、权威、圣洁等价值。另外, 全球化心理学的发展繁荣, 促使道德心理学重新审视已有的理论、范式和发现, 两个领域的进一步交叉融合将产生更多与时俱进的思想碰撞和研究成果。实践层面上, 加深不同文化背景、不同文化经历的个体, 在道德判断与行为上存在何种文化差异的理解, 有助于缓解和减少人们由于道德分歧和价值冲突而产生的偏见、敌意、歧视和污名。同时, 更好地理解与全球化进程有关的心理过程和道德心理如何交互影响, 有助于研究者、决策者、从业者和普通大众等在收获全球化所带来益处的基础上, 尽可能减少不同文明和价值观念碰撞之后产生的激烈冲突。

展望未来, 值得社会心理学家进一步探究的研究议题可包括但并不限于以下几个方面。首先, 在中国文化变迁背景下, 现代化、城市化、文化迁徙等过程的广度与深度如何影响个体的道德观念和道德行为模式。比如, 兼具个人传统性和个人现代性的双文化个体(比如城市新移民群体), 如何在不同的文化情境中进行文化框架转换, 如何在道德两难情境中做出优先抉择等。同时, 双文化认同整合的高低(bicultural identity integration)或者个体与文化之间契合度的高低(person-culture fit)如何影响人们的文化适应水平和主观幸福感。其次, 个体持续增加的多元文化经历(暨文化体验的广度和深度)如何改写原有的价值体系。比如, 丰富的多元文化经历是否会导致道德相对主义的提升, 从而增加不道德行为(包括轻微以及严重的不道德行为)。同时, 多元文化经历也可能会提升人们的辩证思维倾向(Peng & Nisbett, 1999)、增强多重文化认同, 甚至形成多元文化人格。那么人们又会如何知觉、管理和协调多重的文化身份和社会角色, 并且调和相互冲突的道德观念与行为脚本。最后, 与全球化直接相关的心理维度或心理构念(比如全球化取向)如何与道德心理过程相互建构、交互影响。具体而言, 应对全球化的不同心理策略(多元文化习得或者民族文化保护)与个体的道德矩阵是否存在直接关联, 共享的文化规范(inter-subjective cultural norm)与个体所持有的信念和价值(personal values and beliefs)之间的分歧, 如何促使人们在相互冲突的道德原则之间权衡取舍。

伟大的时代诞生有价值的社会心理学议题, 这些富于时代感的道德心理学命题不但是华人社会心理学家们的历史使命与学术责任, 也为中国的社会心理学提供了宝贵的研究素材和发展契机。新时代背景下的社会心理学研究者理应积累更多丰富多元、富于洞见的理论探索与实证研究, 为科学记录时代变迁、让世界读懂中国做出华人社会心理学家的积极贡献。

参考文献

张彦彦, 陈浩 . ( 2009).

西方道德心理学研究新进展: 道德判断的五基准理论

道德与文明, 6, 28-31.

[本文引用: 1]

Arnett, J.J. ( 2003).

The Moral Dimensions of Globalization

American Psychologist, 58( 10), 815-816.

DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.58.10.815b      URL     [本文引用: 1]

ABSTRACT Responds to the comments by L. T. Hoshmand (see record 2003-08988-012) and J. Aros (see record 2003-08988-013) on the article by J. Arnett (see record 2002-18352-003) regarding the psychology of globalization. In this response, Arnett discusses the moral implications of globalization. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

Barrett, H. C., Bolyanatz, A., Crittenden, A. N., Fessler, D. M. T., Fitzpatrick, S., Gurven, M., ... Laurence, S. ( 2016).

Small-scale societies exhibit fundamental variation in the role of intentions in moral judgment

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113( 17), 4688-4693.

DOI:10.1073/pnas.1522070113      URL     [本文引用: 2]

Bedford, O., & Hwang, K.K. ( 2003).

Guilt and Shame in Chinese Culture: A Cross-cultural Framework from the Perspective of Morality and Identity

Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 33( 2), 127-144.

[本文引用: 1]

Boer, D., & Fischer, R.( 2013).

How and when do personal values guide our attitudes and sociality? Explaining cross- cultural variability in attitude-value linkages

Psychological Bulletin, 139( 5), 1113-1147.

[本文引用: 1]

Buchan, N. R., Grimalda, G., Wilson, R., Brewer, M., Fatas, E., & Foddy, M. ( 2009).

Globalization and human cooperation

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106( 11), 4138-4142.

[本文引用: 1]

Buchtel, E. E., Guan, Y., Peng, Q., Su, Y., Sang, B., Chen, S. X., & Bond, M. H. ( 2015).

Immorality East and West Are Immoral Behaviors Especially Harmful, or Especially Uncivilized?

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41( 10), 1382-1394.

[本文引用: 1]

Cai, H., Kwan, V. S. Y., & Sedikides, C. ( 2012).

A sociocultural approach to narcissism: the case of modern China

European Journal of Personality, 26( 5), 529-535.

[本文引用: 1]

Cao, J., Galinsky, A. D., & Maddux, W. W. ( 2014).

Does travel broaden the mind? Breadth of foreign experiences increases generalized trust

Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5( 5), 517-525.

DOI:10.1177/1948550613514456      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Chen, S. X., Benet-Martinez, V., & Bond, M. H. ( 2008).

Bicultural identity, bilingualism, and psychological adjustment in multicultural societies: Immigration-Based and globalization- Based acculturation

Journal of Personality, 76( 4), 803-838

DOI:10.1111/jopy.2008.76.issue-4      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Chen, S. X., Lam, B. C. P., Hui, B. P. H., Ng, J. C. K., Mak, W. W. S., Guan, Y., ... Lau, V. C. Y. . ( 2016).

Conceptualizing psychological processes in response to globalization: Components, antecedents, and consequences of global orientations

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110( 2), 302-331.

[本文引用: 3]

Chesler, P.( 2010).

Worldwide trends in honor killings

Middle East Quarterly, 17( 2).

[本文引用: 1]

Chiu, C.Y., & Kwan, Y.Y . ( 2016).

Globalization and psychology

Current Opinion in Psychology, 8, 44-48.

DOI:10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.09.010      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Chiu, C. Y., Dweck, C. S., Tong, J. Y. Y., & Fu, J. H. Y..( 1997).

Implicit theories and conceptions of morality

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73( 5), 923-940.

[本文引用: 1]

Chiu, C. Y., Gries, P., Torelli, C. J., & Cheng, S. Y. Y..( 2011).

Toward a social psychology of globalization

Journal of Social Issues, 67( 4), 663-676.

DOI:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01721.x      URL     [本文引用: 2]

Cohen, A.B. ( 2009).

Many forms of culture

American Psychologist, 64( 3), 194-204.

[本文引用: 2]

Cohen, A.B. ( 2015).

Religion’s profound influences on psychology morality, intergroup relations, self-construal, and enculturation

Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24( 1), 77-82.

[本文引用: 1]

Cohen, A.B., & Rozin, P.( 2001).

Religion and the morality of mentality

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81( 4), 697-710.

DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.81.4.697      URL     PMID:11642355      [本文引用: 1]

Abstract Christian doctrine considers mental states important in judging a person's moral status, whereas Jewish doctrine considers them less important. The authors provide evidence from 4 studies that American Jews and Protestants differ in the moral import they attribute to mental states (honoring one's parents, thinking about having a sexual affair, and thinking about harming an animal). Although Protestants and Jews rated the moral status of the actions equally. Protestants rated a target person with inappropriate mental states more negatively than did Jews. These differences in moral judgment were partially mediated by Protestants' beliefs that mental states are controllable and likely to lead to action and were strongly related to agreement with general statements claiming that thoughts are morally relevant. These religious differences were not related to differences in collectivistic (interdependent) and individualistic (independent) tendencies.

Cohen, A. B., Wu, M. S., & Miller, J. ( 2016).

Religion and Culture Individualism and Collectivism in the East and West

Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 47( 9), 1236-1249.

[本文引用: 2]

Côté, S., Piff, P. K., & Willer, R. ( 2013).

For whom do the ends justify the means? Social class and utilitarian moral judgment

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104( 3), 490-503.

[本文引用: 1]

Cushman, F., Sheketoff, R., Wharton, S., & Carey, S. ( 2013).

The development of intent-based moral judgment

Cognition, 127( 1), 6-21.

[本文引用: 1]

Davies, C. L., Sibley, C. G., & Liu, J. H. ( 2014).

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire Independent Scale Validation in a New Zealand Sample

Social Psychology, 45(6), 431-436.

DOI:10.1027/1864-9335/a000201      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Davis, D. E., Rice, K., Van Tongeren, D. R., Hook, J. N., DeBlaere, C., Worthington Jr, E. L., & Choe, E. ( 2016).

The moral foundations hypothesis does not replicate well in Black samples

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110( 4), e23-e30.

[本文引用: 1]

Dubois, D., Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D. ( 2015).

Social class, power, and selfishness: When and why upper and lower class individuals behave unethically

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(3), 436-449.

DOI:10.1037/pspi0000008      URL     [本文引用: 2]

Fiske, A. P., & Rai, T. S., Pinker, S. (Eds) .( 2014).

Virtuous violence:hurting and killing to create, sustain, end, and honor social relationships Cambridge University Press hurting and killing to create, sustain, end, and honor social relationships

Cambridge University Press.

[本文引用: 1]

Gelfand, M. J., Lyons, S. L., & Lun, J. ( 2011).

Toward a psychological science of globalization

Journal of Social Issues, 67( 4), 841-853.

[本文引用: 2]

Gold, N., Colman, A. M., & Pulford, B. D. ( 2014).

Cultural differences in responses to real-life and hypothetical trolley problems

Judgment and Decision Making, 9(1), 65-76.

[本文引用: 1]

Graham, J., & Haidt, J.( 2010).

Beyond beliefs: religions bind individuals into moral communities

Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14( 1), 140-150.

DOI:10.1177/1088868309353415      URL     PMID:20089848      [本文引用: 2]

Social psychologists have often followed other scientists in treating religiosity primarily as a set of beliefs held by individuals. But, beliefs are only one facet of this complex and multidimensional construct. The authors argue that social psychology can best contribute to scholarship on religion by being relentlessly social. They begin with a social-functionalist approach in which beliefs, rituals, and other aspects of religious practice are best understood as means of creating a moral community. They discuss the ways that religion is intertwined with five moral foundations, in particular the group-focused "" foundations of Ingroup/loyalty, Authority/respect, Purity/sanctity. The authors use this theoretical perspective to address three mysteries about religiosity, including why religious people are happier, why they are more charitable, and why most people in the world are religious.

Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. ( 2009).

Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96( 5), 1029-1046.

[本文引用: 1]

Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. ( 2013).

Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism

Advances in experimental social psychology, 47(12), 55-130.

[本文引用: 3]

Graham, J., Meindl, P., Beall, E., Johnson, K. M., & Zhang, L. ( 2016).

Cultural differences in moral judgment and behavior, across and within societies

Current Opinion in Psychology, 8, 125-130.

[本文引用: 4]

Graham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. ( 2011).

Mapping the moral domain

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101( 2), 366-385.

[本文引用: 1]

Gray, K., Young, L., & Waytz, A. ( 2012).

Mind perception is the essence of morality

Psychological Inquiry, 23( 2), 101-124.

[本文引用: 1]

Haidt, J.( 2007).

The new synthesis in moral psychology

Science, 316(5827), 998-1002.

DOI:10.1126/science.1137651      URL     [本文引用: 3]

Haidt, J.( 2016).

Why concepts creep to the left

Psychological Inquiry, 27( 1), 40-45.

DOI:10.1080/1047840X.2016.1115713      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Nick Haslam's forthcoming paper, titled "Concept Creep" (available on SSRN) shows that many concepts in psychology have changed over time (e.g., bully

Haidt, J., & Joseph, C.( 2004).

Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues

Daedalus, 133( 4), 55-66.

[本文引用: 1]

Hong, Y. Y. ( 2009).

A dynamic constructivist approach to culture:Moving from describing culture to explaining culture

In R. S. Wyer, C. Y. Chiu. & Y. Y. Hong (Ed.), Understanding culture: Theory, research and application (pp. 3-23). New York: New York Press.

[本文引用: 1]

Hong, Y. Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C. Y., & Benet-martínez, V. ( 2000).

Multicultural minds: a dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition

American Psychologist, 55( 7), 709-720.

DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.55.7.709      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Hu, X.M. ( 2017).

Global orientations and moral foundations: A cross-cultural examination among American domestic, Chinese domestic, and Chinese international students

( Unpublished doctorial dissertation). Rutgers University- New Brunswick, New Brunswick, NJ.

[本文引用: 1]

Hunter, J.D. ( 1991).

Culture wars: The struggle to define America. New York:

Basic Books.

[本文引用: 1]

Inglehart, R., & Baker, W.E. ( 2000).

Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values

American Sociological Review, 65( 1)19-51.

DOI:10.2307/2657288      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Modernization theorists from Karl Marx to Daniel Bell have argued that economic development brings pervasive cultural changes. But others, from Max Weber to Samuel Huntington, have claimed that cultural values are an enduring and autonomous influence on society. We test the thesis that economic development is linked with systematic changes in basic values. Using data from the three waves of the World Values Surveys, which include 65 societies and 75 percent of the world's population, we find evidence of both massive cultural change and the persistence of distinctive cultural traditions. Economic development is associated with shifts away from absolute norms and values toward values that are increasingly rational, tolerant, trusting, and participatory. Cultural change, however, is path dependent. The broad cultural heritage of a society-Protestant, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Confucian, or Communist-leaves an imprint on values that endures despite modernization. Moreover, the differences between the values held by members of different religions within given societies are much smaller than are cross-national differences. Once established, such cross-cultural differences become part of a national culture transmitted by educational institutions and mass media. We conclude with some proposed revisions of modernization theory.

Janoff-Bulman, R.( 2009).

To provide or protect: Motivational bases of political liberalism and conservatism

Psychological Inquiry, 20( 2-3), 120-128.

[本文引用: 1]

Kim, K. R., Kang, J. S., & Yun, S. ( 2012).

Moral intuitions and political orientation: Similarities and differences between South Korea and the United States

Psychological Reports: Sociocultural Issues in Psychology, 111( 1), 173-185

[本文引用: 1]

Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., & Keltner, D. ( 2011).

Social class as culture the convergence of resources and rank in the social realm

Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20( 4), 246-250.

DOI:10.1177/0963721411414654      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Abstract Social class reflects more than the material conditions of people’s lives. Objective resources (e.g., income) shape cultural practices and behaviors that signal social class. These signals create cultural identities among upper- and lower-class individuals—identities that are rooted in subjective perceptions of social-class rank vis-à-vis others. Empirical studies find that perceptions of social-class rank influence patterns of contextual versus dispositional cognition and other- versus self-oriented affect and behavior that are consistent with objective resource-based measures of social class. Our theoretical conceptualization emphasizes the utility of measuring and manipulating perceptions of social-class rank to better understand how social class influences thought and action across diverse social domains.

Lehman, D. R., Chiu, C., & Schaller, M. ( 2004).

Psychology and culture

Annual Review of Psychology, 55( 1), 689-714.

[本文引用: 1]

Leung, A. K.Y., & Cohen, D.( 2011).

Within- and between-culture variation: Individual differences and the cultural logics of honor, face, and dignity cultures

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(3), 507-526.

DOI:10.1037/a0022151      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Leung, A. K. Y., Maddux, W. W., Galinsky, A. D., & Chiu, C. Y. ( 2008).

Multicultural experience enhances creativity: The when and how

American Psychologist, 63( 3), 169-181.

[本文引用: 1]

Leung, A. K. Y.,Qiu, L., & Chiu, C. Y. ( 2014).

The psychological science of globalization

In D. Gray (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural identity:Basic and applied perspectives, (pp. 181-201). Oxford University Press.

[本文引用: 2]

Lu, J. G., Hafenbrack, A. C., Eastwick, P. W., Wang, D. J., Maddux, W. W., & Galinsky, A. D. ( 2017).

“Going Out” of the box: Close intercultural friendships and romantic relationships spark creativity, workplace innovation, and entrepreneurship

Journal of Applied Psychology, 102( 7), 1091-1108.

DOI:10.1037/apl0000212      URL     [本文引用: 1]

Lu, J. G., Martin, A., Usova, A., & Galinsky, A. D.( 2017) .

Creativity and humor across cultures:Where Aha meets Haha In S R Luria, J Baer, & J C Kaufman (Eds), Explorations in creativity research San Diego, CA: Academic Press Where Aha meets Haha

In S. R. Luria, J. Baer, & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Explorations in creativity research San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

[本文引用: 1]

Lu, J. G., Quoidbach, J., Gino, F., Chakroff, A., Maddux, W. W., & Galinsky, A. D. ( 2017).

The dark side of going abroad: how broad foreign experiences increase immoral behavior

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112( 1), 1-16.

[本文引用: 1]

Marsella, A.( 2012).

Psychology and globalization: Understanding a complex relationship

Journal of Social Issues, 68( 3), 454-472.

[本文引用: 2]

Miller, J.G., & Bersoff, D.M . ( 1992).

Culture and moral judgment: how are conflicts between justice and interpersonal responsibilities resolved?

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62( 4), 541-554.

[本文引用: 2]

Miller, J.G., & Bersoff, D.M . ( 1994).

Cultural influences on the moral status of reciprocity and the discounting of endogenous motivation

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20( 5), 592-602.

[本文引用: 1]

Morris, M. W., Chiu, C. Y., & Liu, Z. ( 2015).

Polycultural psychology

Annual Review of Psychology, 66( 1), 631-659.

[本文引用: 2]

Morris, M. W., Mok, A., & Mor, S. ( 2011).

Cultural identity threat: The role of cultural identifications in moderating closure responses to foreign cultural inflow

Journal of Social Issues, 67( 4), 760-773.

[本文引用: 1]

Narvaez, D., & Hill, P.L. ( 2010).

The relation of multicultural experiences to moral judgment and mindsets

Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 3( 1), 43-55.

[本文引用: 1]

Nilsson, A., & Erlandsson, A.( 2015).

The Moral Foundations taxonomy: Structural validity and relation to political ideology in Sweden

Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 28-32.

[本文引用: 1]

Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. ( 2001).

Culture and systems of thought: holistic versus analytic cognition

Psychological Review, 108( 2), 291-310.

[本文引用: 1]

Oishi, S.( 2014).

Socioecological Psychology

Annual Review of Psychology. 65( 1), 581-609.

[本文引用: 1]

Oishi, S.,Graham, J.( 2010).

Social ecology: Lost and found in psychological science

Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5( 4):356-377.

[本文引用: 1]

Oyserman, D., & Sorensen, N .( 2009).

Understanding cultural syndrome effects on what and how we think:A Situated Cognition Model

In R S Wyer, CY Chiu, & Y Y Hong (Eds), Understanding culture: Theory, Research, and Application (pp 25-52) New York, NY: Psychology Press A Situated Cognition Model. (pp. 25-52). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

ABSTRACT What is meant by culture and how does it matter? In this chapter, we argue that culture is best understood as a multidimensional rather than a unitary construct. Specifically, we propose that societies socialize for and individuals have access to a diverse set of overlapping and contradictory processes and procedures for making sense of the world and that the processes and procedures that are cued in the moment influence the values, relationality, self-concept, well-being, and cognition that are salient in the moment. This interpretation contrasts with the more common discourse on culture as a single, unified, chronically accessible whole that is isomorphic with one's country of origin. In the following sections, we outline our perspective and supporting evidence from recent meta-analytic summaries and follow-up studies that, taken together, suggest that such a situated syndrome perspective offers the potential to unpack more of what is meant by "culture's consequences" o borrow the title of Geert Hofstede's (1980) seminal book. In making our case we also borrow from Triandis (1996) the term syndrome to describe culture. Cultural syndromes are networks of associated features, such that cuing one feature is likely, through spreading activation, to make other features salient in working memory as well. We assume that societies do not have a unitary culture or even a single cultural syndrome, but rather have access to a multiplicity of overlapping and potentially conflicting cultural syndromes that are differentially salient, depending on where one is in a society's structure and what is relevant at the moment. This notion of multiplicity can be contrasted with the notion of culture as a single entity (e.g., individualism or collectivism), something one has (e.g., a "cultured" person), or a general style of living (e.g., a "culture" of honor or of filial piety) that is fixed (e.g., Chinese "culture" is over five thousand years old). Culture, from our perspective, involves mindsets, practices, and styles of engaging; it is these implicit and nonconscious as well as more explicit and conscious mental representations that are the focus of our attention and the propensity for one or another to be cued differs across societies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

Peng, K., & Nisbett, R.E. ( 1999).

Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction

American Psychologist, 54( 9), 741-754.

[本文引用: 1]

Piff, P. K., Kraus, M. W., Côté, S., Cheng, B. H., & Keltner, D. ( 2010).

Having less, giving more: the influence of social class on prosocial behavior

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99( 5), 771-784.

[本文引用: 1]

Piff, P. K., Stancato, D. M., Côté, S., Mendoza-Denton, R., & Keltner, D. ( 2012).

Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109( 11), 4086-4091.

[本文引用: 1]

Reimers, E.( 2007).

Representations of an honor killing: Intersections of discourses on culture, gender, equality, social class, and nationality

Feminist Media Studies, 7( 3), 239-255.

[本文引用: 1]

Schäfer, M., Haun, D. B. M., & Tomasello, M. ( 2015).

Fair is not fair everywhere

Psychological Science, 26( 8), 1252-1260.

[本文引用: 1]

Shariff, A. F., Piazza, J., & Kramer, S. R. ( 2014).

Morality and the religious mind: why theists and nontheists differ

Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18( 9), 439-441.

[本文引用: 2]

Shariff, A. F., Willard, A. K., Andersen, T., & Norenzayan, A. ( 2016).

Religious priming a meta-analysis with a focus on prosociality

Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20( 1), 27-48.

[本文引用: 1]

Shweder, R.A., & Haidt, J.( 1993).

The future of moral psychology: Truth, intuition, and the pluralist way

Psychological Science, 4( 6), 360-365.

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00582.x      URL     [本文引用: 1]

This study investigated the utility of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response theory (IRT) models for testing the comparability of psychological measurements. Both procedures were used to investigate whether mood ratings collected in Minnesota and China were comparable. Several issues were addressed. The first issue was that of establishing a common measurement scale across groups, which involves full or partial measurement invariance of trait indicators. It is shown that using CFA or IRT models, test items that function differentially as trait indicators across groups need not interfere with comparing examinees on the same trait dimension. Second, the issue of model fit was addressed. It is proposed that person-fit statistics be used to judge the practical fit of IRT models. Finally, topics for future research are suggested.

Shweder, R. A., Mahapatra, M., & Miller, J. G.( 1987).

Culture and moral development

In J. Kagan & S. Lamb (Eds.). The emergence of morality in young children (pp. 1-83). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

[本文引用: 1]

Stephens, N. M., Markus, H. R., & Townsend, S. S. M.( 2007).

Choice as an act of meaning: the case of social class

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93( 5), 814-30.

[本文引用: 1]

Tadmor, C. T., Hong, Y. Y., Chao, M. M., Wiruchnipawan, F., & Wang, W. ( 2012).

Multicultural experiences reduce intergroup bias through epistemic unfreezing

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103( 5), 750-772.

[本文引用: 1]

Talhelm, T., Haidt, J., Oishi, S., Zhang, X., Miao, F. F., & Chen, S. ( 2015).

Liberals think more analytically (more “WEIRD”) than conservatives

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41( 2), 250-267.

DOI:10.1177/0146167214563672      URL     PMID:25540328      [本文引用: 1]

Henrich and colleagues (2010) summarized cultural differences in psychology and argued that people from one particular culture are outliers: people from societi

Talhelm, T., Zhang, X., Oishi, S., Shimin, C., Duan, D., Lan, X., & Kitayama, S. ( 2014).

Large-scale psychological differences within China explained by rice versus wheat agriculture

Science, 344( 6184), 603-608.

DOI:10.1126/science.1246850      URL     PMID:24812395      [本文引用: 1]

Abstract Cross-cultural psychologists have mostly contrasted East Asia with the West. However, this study shows that there are major psychological differences within China. We propose that a history of farming rice makes cultures more interdependent, whereas farming wheat makes cultures more independent, and these agricultural legacies continue to affect people in the modern world. We tested 1162 Han Chinese participants in six sites and found that rice-growing southern China is more interdependent and holistic-thinking than the wheat-growing north. To control for confounds like climate, we tested people from neighboring counties along the rice-wheat border and found differences that were just as large. We also find that modernization and pathogen prevalence theories do not fit the data.

Tetlock, P. E., Kristel, O. V., Elson, S. B., Green, M. C., & Lerner, J. S. ( 2000).

The psychology of the unthinkable: taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78( 5), 853-870.

[本文引用: 1]

Turiel, E. ( 1983).The development of social knowledge:Morality and convention. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

[本文引用: 1]

Vauclair, C.M., & Fischer, R.( 2011).

Do cultural values predict individuals' moral attitudes? A cross-cultural multilevel approach

European Journal of Social Psychology, 41( 5), 645-657.

[本文引用: 1]

Wei, W., Lu, J. G., Galinsky, A. D., Wu, H., Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., … Wang, L. ( 2017).

Regional ambient temperature is associated with human personality

Nature Human Behaviour, 1(12), 890-895

[本文引用: 1]

Yamawaki, N.( 2012).

Within-culture variations of collectivism in Japan

Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43( 8), 1191-1204.

[本文引用: 2]

Yang, D. Y. J., Chiu, C. Y., Chen, X., Cheng, S. Y. Y., Kwan, L. Y. Y., Tam, K. P., & Yeh, K. H. ( 2011).

Lay psychology of globalization and its social impact

Journal of Social Issues, 67( 4), 677-695.

Yilmaz, O., Harma, M., Bahcekapili, H. G., & Cesur, S. ( 2016).

Validation of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire in Turkey and its relation to cultural schemas of individualism and collectivism

Personality and Individual Differences, 99, 149-154.

[本文引用: 1]

Young, L., & Saxe, R.( 2011).

The role of intent for distinct moral domains

Cognition, 120( 2), 202-214.

[本文引用: 1]

Yu, F., Peng, T., Peng, K. P., Tang, S., Chen, C. S., Qian, X. J., ... Chai, F. Y. ( 2016).

Cultural value shifting in pronoun use

Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 47( 2), 310-316.

[本文引用: 1]

/

〈 〉


版权所有 © 《心理科学进展》编辑部
地址：北京市朝阳区林萃路16号院　
邮编：100101　
电话：010-64850861　
E-mail：jinzhan@psych.ac.cn
备案编号：京ICP备10049795号-1 京公网安备110402500018号

本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发