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 ›› 2025, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (2): 351-361.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2025.0351

• 研究前沿 • 上一篇    下一篇

心理学视角下的价值观冲突:影响及其理论解释

岳童1, 王洪2, 李庆功3, 任晓筱4, 张欣怡1   

  1. 1西南大学心理学与社会发展研究中心; 西南大学心理学部, 重庆 400715;
    2重庆师范大学应用心理学重点实验室, 重庆师范大学教师教育学院, 重庆师范大学教育科学学院, 重庆 401331;
    3浙江省儿童青少年心理健康与危机干预智能实验室, 金华 321004;
    4陕西师范大学心理学院, 西安 710062
  • 收稿日期:2024-02-08 出版日期:2025-02-15 发布日期:2024-12-06
  • 通讯作者: 王洪, E-mail: 20131691@cqnu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    * 重庆市教育委员会人文社会科学研究项目(24SKJD071)、重庆市自然科学基金面上联合实施项目(4322400175)和浙江省哲学社会科学规划研究方法创新专项课题(23SYS09ZD)资助

Values conflicts from a psychological perspective: Impact and theoretical explanation

YUE Tong1, WANG Hong2, LI Qinggong3, REN Xiaoxiao4, ZHANG Xinyi1   

  1. 1Research Center for Psychology and Social Development, Southwest University; School of Psychology, Southwest University, Chongqing 400715, China;
    2Key Laboratory of Applied Psychology, School of Teacher Education, College of Educational Science, Chongqing Normal University, College of Educational Science, Chongqing 401331, China;
    3Zhejiang Philosophy and Social Science Laboratory for the Mental Health and Crisis Intervention of Children and Adolescents, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321001, China;
    4School of Psychology, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710062, China
  • Received:2024-02-08 Online:2025-02-15 Published:2024-12-06

摘要: 价值观冲突是指个体之间由于不同的价值观念而产生的相互否定和竞争现象。在当前心理学领域的实证研究中, 价值观冲突通常分为两类:一类是因价值观念或身份无法兼容而引发的长期冲突, 另一类是由价值两难选择任务引发的即时冲突。这两类冲突都可能导致一系列消极的心理影响, 例如增加压力感知、焦虑水平和心理紧张度。研究者主要从价值观背后的动机对立性和自我概念完整性的威胁感知两个方面, 来解释价值观冲突的产生原因及其影响。未来的研究需要进一步明确价值观冲突的产生机制, 扩展对调节因素的认识, 并揭示其对个体的影响, 以开展相应的调节与干预研究。

关键词: 价值观冲突, 价值观理论, 自我概念威胁, 价值观环状连续体

Abstract: This paper provides an in-depth analysis of value conflicts from a psychological perspective, focusing on their background, manifestations, and impact on individual mental health. In today’s society, where globalization and cultural exchange are increasingly prevalent, conflicts between different value systems have become more pronounced. The clash between traditional and modern values, Eastern and Western philosophies, and collectivism versus individualism forms the complex landscape of contemporary value conflicts. This study introduces a novel framework to understand these conflicts by categorizing them into two types: long-term conflicts and immediate conflicts, and by exploring the psychological mechanisms that drive them.
Long-term conflicts arise when individuals hold two conflicting values that are difficult to reconcile, such as collectivist versus individualist values. These conflicts occur when individuals cannot find a balance between these values, leading to sustained psychological stress, anxiety, and eventually a decrease in overall well-being. For instance, research has shown that individuals who highly value family obligations often face emotional distress when trying to pursue personal freedom. This type of conflict has a profound impact on mental health, as the inability to reconcile competing value systems generates ongoing internal tension. Moreover, conflicts between social roles—such as work responsibilities and family commitments—further exacerbate the psychological strain, making it difficult for individuals to manage these competing priorities.
In contrast, immediate conflicts are short-lived but intense, arising when individuals are forced to make decisions between opposing values within a short timeframe. Although the duration of these conflicts is brief, they can generate significant psychological pressure. Experimental studies in controlled settings have demonstrated that tasks requiring individuals to choose between values such as “honesty” and “altruism” often result in increased activation in brain regions related to conflict detection and emotion regulation, such as the prefrontal cortex and cingulate cortex. These neural responses suggest that value conflicts not only involve cognitive decision-making but also provoke strong emotional reactions, which can contribute to the psychological burden during moments of intense decision-making.
The theoretical contribution of this paper is grounded in two major psychological explanations for value conflicts. The first is the motivational opposition hypothesis, which posits that value conflicts arise because different values represent opposing motivational goals. Drawing from Schwartz’s value theory, this paper explains how self-enhancement values (such as power and achievement) frequently conflict with self-transcendence values (such as benevolence and universalism). These conflicts generate internal motivational tension, as individuals are often forced to choose between their personal success and the welfare of others or society. For example, an individual who values both material success and social harmony may experience prolonged stress as these goals often pull them in different directions.
Secondly, the paper introduces the self-concept consistency theory, which argues that value conflicts threaten individuals’ sense of identity. When people hold incompatible values, their self-concept—how they define and perceive themselves—becomes fragmented, leading to inner tension. For example, individuals who place a high value on both environmental sustainability and materialism face a significant identity conflict, as these values are often seen as contradictory. Psychological discomfort arises when individuals attempt to reconcile these incompatible values. Research suggests that maintaining a consistent self-concept is essential for mental health, and disruptions caused by value conflicts can lead to negative emotions such as guilt, stress, and anxiety.
In conclusion, this paper offers a comprehensive theoretical framework for understanding value conflicts and their psychological impact. By distinguishing between long-term and immediate conflicts, and by delving into their underlying mechanisms, this study sheds light on how these conflicts shape individual well-being. The integration of the motivational opposition hypothesis and self-concept consistency theory provides a nuanced understanding of why value conflicts are so impactful on mental health. Furthermore, this framework offers insights into potential avenues for future research, particularly in exploring cultural differences in how value conflicts manifest and their subsequent effects on mental health. The paper suggests that further investigation into therapeutic interventions and conflict resolution strategies could mitigate the negative psychological effects of value conflicts, helping individuals navigate these challenges more effectively.

Key words: values conflicts, value theory, self concept threat, circular continuum of values