关键词: 感知环境威胁, 不道德行为, 压力, 社会规范

Abstract: Environmental threats have emerged as one of the most pressing global challenges of our time. While extensive research has examined the economic, social, and health-related consequences of environmental degradation, its impact on moral psychology remains underexplored. Existing studies have primarily focused on whether environmental threats elicit unethical behaviors, yet little is known about how such threats may influence individuals’ moral evaluations—specifically, their tolerance toward unethical behaviors. Drawing on social norm theory, which distinguishes between descriptive norms (“what is”) and injunctive norms (“what ought to be”), this paper proposes that perceived environmental threats may not only alter perceptions of moral behavior prevalence but also shift moral standards themselves. The present research introduces the concept of the “moral smog effect,” which suggests that environmental threats, through heightened psychological stress, may erode individuals’ commitment to abstract moral principles and increase their acceptance of unethical conduct. Across five studies (total N = 4,246), we employed a multi-method approach combining secondary data analysis and experimental methods to examine the relationship between perceived environmental threat and moral judgment. Studies 1a and 1b analyzed two large-scale datasets—the 2021 Chinese General Social Survey and the fifth wave of the World Values Survey (Chinese subsample)—using correlational methods to assess the link between perceived environmental threat and acceptability of unethical behaviors. Study 2 adopted a single-factor between-participants experimental design, manipulating environmental threat via scenario priming (high vs. low threat), followed by participants’ moral evaluations of a series of unethical behaviors. Study 3 utilized a 2 (perceived environmental threat: high vs. low) × 2 (psychological stress: induced vs. neutral) between-participants design, enabling a test of the mediating role of stress through a “manipulation-of-mediation-as-a-moderator” design. Study 4 employed a 2 (perceived environmental threat: high vs. low) × 2 (moral agent: self vs. other) between-participants design. Together, these studies allow for a robust triangulation of evidence across observational and causal paradigms. The findings across these five studies converge on the conclusion that perceived environmental threats consistently increased individuals’ acceptance of unethical behaviors. This relationship was robust across diverse measurement tools, data sources, and research designs. Experimental results further demonstrated that the experience of environmental threat elevates stress levels, which in turn reduces individuals’ cognitive capacity to uphold abstract moral norms, leading to greater moral leniency. Importantly, Study 4 found no evidence of moral hypocrisy under threat: participants became equally tolerant of unethical behavior whether it was enacted by themselves or others. This finding suggests that environmental stress may diminish individuals’ ability to distinguish between moral agents, likely due to reduced cognitive resources under stress. This research advances theoretical understanding in both environmental psychology and moral cognition by highlighting how environmental threats can undermine injunctive moral norms, not just descriptive ones. The concept of the “moral smog effect” contributes to a broader recognition that the psychological consequences of environmental degradation extend beyond emotions and health to include value systems and social norms. Practically, these findings carry significant implications for public policy and moral education. In an era of escalating environmental risk, fostering psychologically safe and low-stress environments (e.g., through urban green spaces, flexible working conditions, and community support systems) may help safeguard not only public well-being but also the moral fabric of society. Recognizing the moral costs of environmental threat thus adds a critical dimension to the discourse on sustainable development and ethical governance.

Key words: perceived environmental threat, unethical behavior, stress, social norms