伤害厌恶的二因素结构及其抑制攻击的机制

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.1231

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

伤害厌恶是人类道德的核心, 揭示它的结构与功能具有重要意义。伤害厌恶由伤害行为厌恶和伤害结果厌恶这两个相对独立的因素构成的观点尚未获得有力的实证支持, 这两个因素在抑制攻击方面的差异及其背后的机制也不清楚。为了探究这些问题, 我们实施了1个预实验和3个正式实验。预实验基于加工分离程序开发了伤害行为/结果厌恶分离任务, 实验1使用该任务检验了伤害厌恶的结构, 实验2 (包括2a和2b)探究了伤害行为/结果厌恶抑制攻击的道德认知机制。研究结果显示, 伤害厌恶由伤害行为厌恶和伤害结果厌恶这两个相对独立的因素构成。伤害结果厌恶可以通过道德推脱抑制攻击, 但伤害行为厌恶对道德推脱和攻击的抑制作用不稳健。通过上述实验, 本研究开发了伤害厌恶的研究工具, 检验了伤害厌恶的二因素结构及其在抑制攻击认知与行为上的差异, 揭示了伤害厌恶抑制攻击的道德认知路径。

关键词: 伤害行为厌恶, 伤害结果厌恶, 加工分离程序, 攻击, 道德推脱

Abstract:

Harm aversion is a core component of human morality that prevents individuals from harming others and is crucial for biological evolution. It has the positive functions of reducing immoral behavior (such as aggression) and increasing prosocial behavior. Individuals who lack harm aversion may exhibit increased antisocial behavior, which in turn, may cause significant harm to other individuals and society in general. Therefore, exploring the concept of harm aversion has significant theoretical and practical value. However, it remains unclear whether harm aversion is composed of two relatively independent factors and how these two factors differ in their functions and mechanisms related to the inhibition of aggression. This study hypothesized that harm aversion comprises two independent factors: harm action aversion and harm outcome aversion. Additionally, both harm action aversion and harm outcome aversion can inhibit aggression, and moral disengagement is a crucial cognitive mechanism through which harm aversion inhibits aggression.

A pilot study and three formal experiments were conducted to test these hypotheses. In the pilot study (N=40), incongruent conditions and congruent conditions based on the process dissociation procedure were developed to separate harm action aversion and harm outcome aversion. Participants completed the harm action/outcome aversion dissociation task, assessed the difficulty of choice and imagination, and provided suggestions for modifications. In Experiment 1 (N = 287), the modified harm action/outcome aversion dissociation task was used. The validity of this task was examined using criterion variables such as empathy, moral judgment, deontology parameter, psychopathy, physical aggression, and verbal aggression. Experiments 2a (N = 423) and 2b (N = 107) explored whether moral disengagement mediated the relationship between harm action/outcome aversion and aggression. Specifically, Experiment 2a used questionnaires to measure moral disengagement and aggression, while Experiment 2b employed an aggression task to measure moral disengagement and aggressive behavior levels.

The pilot study demonstrated that the process dissociation procedure could effectively separate harm action aversion and harm outcome aversion. Experiment 1 found no significant correlation between harm action aversion (Parameter A) and harm outcome aversion (Parameter O). Both Parameters A and O were positively correlated with harm action aversion scores, empathy, moral judgment, and deontology parameter, and negatively correlated with psychopathy and physical aggression. Compared to Parameter A, Parameter O showed stronger relationships with empathy, psychopathy, and verbal aggression. The correlation between Parameter A and harm outcome aversion was not significant. In Experiments 2a and 2b, harm outcome aversion negatively predicted aggression through the mediating effect of moral disengagement. However, while Experiment 2a showed a mediating effect in that harm action aversion negatively predicted physical aggression through moral disengagement, this mediating effect was not significant in Experiment 2b.

These results suggest, therefore, that harm aversion comprises two independent factors: harm action aversion and harm outcome aversion. Harm outcome aversion can inhibit aggression through moral disengagement, but the inhibitory effect of harm action aversion on aggression and moral disengagement is not robust. In developing a research tool for harm aversion, testing the two-factor structure of harm aversion, and examining its cognitive and behavioral differences in inhibiting aggression, this study revealed that moral disengagement is an important cognitive pathway through which harm aversion inhibits aggression. The findings contribute to the theoretical development of harm aversion, and they advance research on the relationship between moral emotions and aggression. This has significant implications for the prevention and intervention of aggressive behavior, as well as practical applications in moral education.

Key words: harm action aversion, harm outcome aversion, process dissociation procedure, aggression, moral disengagement

中图分类号:

B849: C91

岑雨珊, 夏凌翔, 黄润玉, 吕洁. (2025). 伤害厌恶的二因素结构及其抑制攻击的机制. 心理学报, 57(7), 1231-1247.

CEN Yushan, XIA Lingxiang, HUANG Runyu, LÜ Jie. (2025). The two-factor structure of harm aversion and the mechanism underlying its function of resisting aggression. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(7), 1231-1247.

图/表 9

参考文献 88

[1]	Almeida, G., Flanagan, B., & Hannikainen, I. (2024). Trait empathy predicts purposivist rule application: Nationally representative survey evidence. SSRN Electronic Journal. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4710786
[2]	Ariso, J. M. (2022). Is there an internal link between seeing a human and seeing one to whom moral consideration is due? In C. Eriksen, J. Hermann, N. O'Hara, & N. Pleasants (Eds.), Philosophical Perspectives on Moral Certainty (pp. 212-228). Routledge.
[3]	Armstrong, J., Friesdorf, R., & Conway, P. (2018). Clarifying gender differences in moral dilemma judgments: The complementary roles of harm aversion and action aversion. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(3), 353-363.
[4]	Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193-209. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3 pmid: 15661671
[5]	Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Moral Education, 31(2), 101-119.
[6]	Bjärehed, M., Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., & Gini, G. (2020). Mechanisms of moral disengagement and their associations with indirect bullying, direct bullying, and pro-aggressive bystander behavior. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 40(1), 28-55.
[7]	Blair, R. J. R. (1995). A cognitive developmental approach to morality: Investigating the psychopath. Cognition, 57(1), 1-29. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(95)00676-p pmid: 7587017
[8]	Blair, R. J. R. (2007). The amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex in morality and psychopathy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(9), 387-392. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.07.003 pmid: 17707682
[9]	Buss, A. H. (1966). Instrumentality of aggression, feedback, and frustration as determinants of physical aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3(2), 153-162. doi: 10.1037/h0022826 pmid: 5903523
[10]	Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. (1992). The aggression questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(3), 452-459. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.63.3.452 pmid: 1403624
[11]	Caprara, G. V., Fida, R., Vecchione, M., Tramontano, C., & Barbaranelli, C. (2009). Assessing civic moral disengagement: Dimensionality and construct validity. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(5), 504-509.
[12]	Carroll, A., McCarthy, M., Houghton, S., Sanders O'Connor, E., & Zadow, C. (2018). Reactive and proactive aggression as meaningful distinctions at the variable and person level in primary school-aged children. Aggressive Behavior, 44(5), 431-441.
[13]	Cen, Y., Su, S., Dong, Y., & Xia, L. X. (2022). Longitudinal effect of self-control on reactive-proactive aggression: Mediating roles of hostile rumination and moral disengagement. Aggressive Behavior, 48(6), 583-594. doi: 10.1002/ab.22046 pmid: 35853143
[14]	Chowdhury, R., & Fernando, M. (2014). The relationships of empathy, moral identity and cynicism with consumers' ethical beliefs: The mediating role of moral disengagement. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(4), 677-694.
[15]	Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press
[16]	Contreras-Huerta, L. S., Lockwood, P. L., Bird, G., Apps, M., & Crockett, M. J. (2022). Prosocial behavior is associated with transdiagnostic markers of affective sensitivity in multiple domains. Emotion, 22(5), 820-835.
[17]	Conway, P., Dawtry, R. J., Lam, J., & Gheorghiu, A. I. (2024). Is it fair to kill one to save five? How just world beliefs shape sacrificial moral decision-making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Advance online publication. http://doi.org/10.1177/01461672241287815
[18]	Conway, P., & Gawronski, B. (2013). Deontological and utilitarian inclinations in moral decision making: A process dissociation approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(2), 216-235. doi: 10.1037/a0031021 pmid: 23276267
[19]	Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1996). Social information- processing mechanisms on reactive and proactive aggression. Child Development, 67(3), 993-1002. pmid: 8706540
[20]	Crockett, M. J., Clark, L., Hauser, M. D., & Robbins, T. W. (2010). Serotonin selectively influences moral judgment and behavior through effects on harm aversion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(40), 17433-17438. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1009396107 pmid: 20876101
[21]	Crockett, M. J., Kurth-Nelson, Z., Siegel, J. Z., Dayan, P., & Dolan, R. J. (2014). Harm to others outweighs harm to self in moral decision making. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(48), 17320-17325.
[22]	Crockett, M. J., Siegel, J. Z., Kurth-nelson, Z., Ousdal, O. T., Story, G. W., Frieband, C.,... Dolan, R. J. (2015). Dissociable effects of serotonin and dopamine on the valuation of harm in moral decision making. Current Biology, 25(14), 1852-1859. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2015.05.021 pmid: 26144968
[23]	Cushman, F. (2013). Action, outcome, and value: A dual-system framework for morality. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(3), 273-292. doi: 10.1177/1088868313495594 pmid: 23861355
[24]	Cushman, F., Gray, K., Gaffey, A., & Mendes, W. B. (2012). Simulating murder: The aversion to harmful action. Emotion, 12(1), 2-7. doi: 10.1037/a0025071 pmid: 21910540
[25]	Cushman, F., Sheketoff, R., Wharton, S., & Carey, S. (2013). The development of intent-based moral judgment. Cognition, 127(1), 6-21. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.11.008 pmid: 23318350
[26]	Cushman, F., Young, L., & Greene, J. D. (2010). Our multi-system moral psychology:Towards a consensus view. In J. M. Doris (Ed.), Oxford handbook of moral psychology (pp. 1-20). Oxford University Press.
[27]	Cushman, F., Young, L., & Hauser, M. (2006). The role of conscious reasoning and intuition in moral judgment: Testing three principles of harm. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1082-1089. pmid: 17201791
[28]	Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113-126.
[29]	Deng, Q., Deng, J., Lai, H., Huang, Y., & Wang, M. (2017). The factor structure and psychometric properties of the Levenson self-report psychopathic scale. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 25(4), 659-666.
	[邓俏文, 邓嘉欣, 赖红玉, 黄语嫣, 王孟成. (2017). 莱文森精神病态自评量表的因子结构及心理测量学特性分析. 中国临床心理学杂志, 25(4), 659-661.]
[30]	Diedenhofen, B., & Musch, J. (2015). Cocor: A comprehensive solution for the statistical comparison of correlations. Plos One, 10(4), Article e121945. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121945
[31]	Dou, K., Chen, L. Y., Li, Y. Y., Lin, X. Q., Yuan, X. Q., & Li, J. B. (2024). The longitudinal associations between nonviolent/ violent stressful life events, moral disengagement, and online aggression in Chinese young people through the lens of general aggression model. Psychology of Violence, 14(5), 364-372.
[32]	Falla, D., Ortega-Ruiz, R., & Romera, E. M. (2023). Minimizing responsibility in the aggressive dynamics of bullying and its impact on other strategies of moral disengagement: A longitudinal study. Current Psychology, 42(36), 32512-32523.
[33]	Feldmanhall, O., Dalgleish, T., Evans, D., & Mobbs, D. (2015). Empathic concern drives costly altruism. Neuroimage, 105, 347-356. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.10.043 pmid: 25462694
[34]	Fitouchi, L., Andre, J. B., & Baumard, N. (2022). Moral disciplining: The cognitive and evolutionary foundations of puritanical morality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 46, Article e293. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X22002047
[35]	Fung, A. L. (2021). Sex differences in the relationships between forms of peer victimization and reactive and proactive aggression in schoolchildren. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(10), Article 5443 http://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105443
[36]	Gawronski, B., & Ng, N. L. (2025). Beyond trolleyology: The CNI model of moral-dilemma responses. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 29(1), 32-80.
[37]	Gibson, S., & Ninness, B. (2005). Robust maximum-likelihood estimation of multivariable dynamic systems. Automatica, 41(10), 1667-1682.
[38]	Gini, G., Thornberg, R., Bussey, K., Angelini, F., & Pozzoli, T. (2021). Longitudinal links of individual and collective morality with adolescents’ peer aggression. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 51(3), 524-539.
[39]	Gray, K., Waytz, A., & Young, L. (2012). The moral dyad: A fundamental template unifying moral judgment. Psychological Inquiry, 23(2), 206-215. doi: 10.1080/1047840X.2012.686247 pmid: 22815620
[40]	Greene, J. D., Cushman, F. A., Stewart, L. E., Lowenberg, K., Nystrom, L. E., & Cohen, J. D. (2009). Pushing moral buttons: The interaction between personal force and intention in moral judgment. Cognition, 111(3), 364-371. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.02.001 pmid: 19375075
[41]	Guo, Y., Li, R., & Xia, L. X. (2024). Effects of relative deprivation on change in displaced aggression and the underlying motivation mechanism: A three-wave cross-lagged analysis. British Journal of Psychology, 115(1), 1-19.
[42]	Hou, Y., Li, X., & Xia, L. X. (2024). Common mechanisms underlying the effect of angry rumination on reactive and proactive aggression: A moderated mediation model. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 39(5-6), 1035-1057.
[43]	Hoyle, R. H., & Panter, A. T. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 158-176). Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.
[44]	Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30(5), 513-541.
[45]	Khemka, S., Tzovara, A., Gerster, S., Quednow, B. B., & Bach, D. R. (2017). Modeling startle eyeblink electromyogram to assess fear learning. Psychophysiology, 54(2), 204-214. doi: 10.1111/psyp.12775 pmid: 27753123
[46]	Levenson, M. R., Kiehl, K. A., & Fitzpatrick, C. M. (1995). Assessing psychopathic attributes in a noninstitutionalized population. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(1), 151-158. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.68.1.151 pmid: 7861311
[47]	Leviston, Z., & Walker, I. (2020). Influence of moral disengagement on responses to climate change. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 24(2), 144-155.
[48]	Li, R., & Xia, L. (2021). The mediating effect of aggression motivation on the relationship between trait anger and reactive aggression: A longitudinal study. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(7), 788-797. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00788
	[李芮, 夏凌翔. (2021). 攻击动机对特质愤怒与反应性攻击关系的中介作用:一项纵向研究. 心理学报, 53(7), 788-797.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00788
[49]	Li, X., & Xia, L. (2024). A serial cascade effect of cybervictimization and hostile rumination on the within-person change of moral disengagement. Journal of Personality. 92(6), 1726-1743.
[50]	Li, Y. (2023). Cognitive and emotional factors in moral decision- making. Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 22, 774-779.
[51]	Liao, J., Wang, J., Jia, S., Cai, Z., & Liu, H. (2024). Correlation of muscle strength, working memory, and activities of daily living in older adults. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 16, Article1453527. http://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2024.1453527
[52]	Little, R. J., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York, NY: Wiley.
[53]	Martinez, R. M., Chou, S. H., Fan, Y. T., Chen, Y. C., Goh, K. K., & Chen, C. (2024). Negative emotionality down-regulation affects moral choice but not moral judgement of harm: A pharmacological study. Scientific Reports, 14(1), Article 1200. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-51345-8
[54]	Miller, R., & Cushman, F. (2013). Aversive for me, wrong for you: First-person behavioral aversions underlie the moral condemnation of harm. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(10), 707-718.
[55]	Miller, R. M., Hannikainen, I. A., & Cushman, F. A. (2014). Bad actions or bad outcomes? Differentiating affective contributions to the moral condemnation of harm. Emotion, 14(3), 573-587. doi: 10.1037/a0035361 pmid: 24512250
[56]	Nocera, T. R., Dahlen, E. R., Poor, A., Strowd, J., Dortch, A., & Van Overloop, E. C. (2022). Moral disengagement mechanisms predict cyber aggression among emerging adults. Cyberpsychology-Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 16(1), 1-18.
[57]	Ogunfowora, B. T., Nguyen, V. Q., Steel, P., & Hwang, C. C. (2022). A meta-analytic investigation of the antecedents, theoretical correlates, and consequences of moral disengagement at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(5), 746-775.
[58]	Ouvrein, G., De Backer, C. J. S., & Vandebosch, H. (2018). Online celebrity aggression: A combination of low empathy and high moral disengagement? The relationship between empathy and moral disengagement and adolescents' online celebrity aggression. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 61-69.
[59]	Patil, I. (2015). Trait psychopathy and utilitarian moral judgement: The mediating role of action aversion. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27(3), 349-366.
[60]	Pavailler, N., Gevers, W., & Burle, B. (in press). Temporal metacognition: Direct readout or mental construct? The case of introspective reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001708
[61]	Pearson, K., & Filon, L. N. G. (1898). Mathematical contributions to the theory of evolution.—IV. On the probable errors of frequency constants and on the influence of random selection on variation and correlation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series a, Containing Papers of a Mathematical or Physical Character, 191, 229-311.
[62]	Perera, P., Canic, E., & Ludvig, E. A. (2016). Cruel to be kind but not cruel for cash: Harm aversion in the dictator game. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(3), 893-898.
[63]	Quan, F., Yang, R., Zhu, W., Wang, Y., Gong, X., Chen, Y.,... Xia, L. (2019). The relationship between hostile attribution bias and aggression and the mediating effect of anger rumination. Personality and Individual Differences, 139, 228-234.
[64]	Reynolds, C. J., & Conway, P. (2018). Not just bad actions: Affective concern for bad outcomes contributes to moral condemnation of harm in moral dilemmas. Emotion, 18(7), 1009-1023. doi: 10.1037/emo0000413 pmid: 29389202
[65]	Richard, F. D., Bond, C. F., & Stokes-Zoota, J. J. (2003). One hundred years of social psychology quantitatively described. Review of General Psychology, 7(4), 331-363.
[66]	Rong, X., Sun, B., Huang, X., Cai, M., & Li, W. (2010). Reliabilities and validities of Chinese version of interpersonal reactivity index. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 18(2), 158-160.
	[戎幸, 孙炳海, 黄小忠, 蔡旻颖, 李伟健. (2010). 人际反应指数量表的信度和效度研究. 中国临床心理学杂志, 18(2), 158-160.]
[67]	Sarlo, M., Lotto, L., Rumiati, R., & Palomba, D. (2014). If it makes you feel bad, don't do it! Egoistic rather than altruistic empathy modulates neural and behavioral responses in moral dilemmas. Physiology and Behavior, 130, 127-134.
[68]	Shen, Y., Yuan, L., Xiong, X., & Xin, T. (2023). Empathy and cyberbystander behavior: The role of moral disengagement. Current Psychology 42(21), 18070-18079.
[69]	Sonnentag, T. L., Wadian, T. W., & Wolfson, M. J. (2024). The role of moral identity in the salience of the prescriptive and proscriptive systems of moral self-regulation. Ethics & Behavior, 34(6), 425-437.
[70]	Su, S., & Xia, L. X. (2024). Neurostructural correlates of harm action/outcome aversion: The role of empathy. Neuroimage, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2024.120972.
[71]	Teng, Z., Nie, Q., Guo, C., Zhang, Q., Liu, Y., & Bushman, B. J. (2019). A longitudinal study of link between exposure to violent video games and aggression in Chinese adolescents: The mediating role of moral disengagement. Developmental Psychology, 55(1), 184-195. doi: 10.1037/dev0000624 pmid: 30335433
[72]	Thornberg, R., Pozzoli, T., & Gini, G. (2022). Defending or remaining passive as a bystander of school bullying in Sweden: The role of moral disengagement and anti-bullying class norms. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(19-20), NP18666-NP18689.
[73]	Vaughan, E. P., Speck, J. S., Frick, P. J., Walker, T. M., Robertson, E. L., Ray, J. V.,... Cauffman, E. (2023). Proactive and reactive aggression: Developmental trajectories and longitudinal associations with callous-unemotional traits, impulsivity, and internalizing emotions. Development and Psychopathology, Advance online publication. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579423000317
[74]	Vollberg, M. C., & Cikara, M. (2024). Affective prediction errors in persistence and escalation of aggression. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 153(6), 1551-1567.
[75]	Wagenmakers, E. J., Love, J., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Ly, A., Verhagen, J.,... Morey, R. D. (2018). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: Example applications with JASP. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(1), 58-76.
[76]	Wagenmakers, E. J., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Ly, A., Verhagen, J., Love, J.,... Morey, R. D. (2018). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: Theoretical advantages and practical ramifications. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(1), 35-57.
[77]	Wagenmakers, E. J., Wetzels, R., Borsboom, D., & van der Maas, H. L. (2011). Why psychologists must change the way they analyze their data: The case of psi: Comment on Bem (2011). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(3), 426-432. doi: 10.1037/a0022790 pmid: 21280965
[78]	Wang, X., Lei, L., Yang, J., Gao, L., & Zhao, F. (2017). Moral disengagement as mediator and moderator of the relation between empathy and aggression among Chinese male juvenile delinquents. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 48(2), 316-326.
[79]	Wang, X., Wang, W., Qiao, Y., Gao, L., Yang, J., & Wang, P. (2022). Parental phubbing and adolescents' cyberbullying perpetration: A moderated mediation model of moral disengagement and online disinhibition. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(7-8), NP5344-NP5366.
[80]	Wang, X., Yang, J., & Gao, L. (2013). The Chinese version of civic moral disengament scale. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 11(6), 838-842.
	[王兴超, 杨继平, 高玲. (2013). 公民道德推脱问卷的中文版修订. 心理与行为研究, 11(6), 838-842.]
[81]	Wiech, K., Kahane, G., Shackel, N., Farias, M., Savulescu, J., & Tracey, I. (2013). Cold or calculating? Reduced activity in the subgenual cingulate cortex reflects decreased emotional aversion to harming in counterintuitive utilitarian judgment. Cognition, 126(3), 364-372. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.11.002 pmid: 23280149
[82]	Wu, Y., & Wen, Z. (2011a). The statistical analysis procedure involving null hypothesis significance testing. Journal of Psychological Science, 34(1), 230-234.
	[吴艳, 温忠麟. (2011a). 与零假设检验有关的统计分析流程. 心理科学, 34(1), 230-234.]
[83]	Wu, Y., & Wen, Z. (2011b). Item parceling strategies in structural equation modeling. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(12), 1859-1867.
	[吴艳, 温忠麟. (2011b). 结构方程建模中的题目打包策略. 心理科学进展, 19(12), 1859-1867.]
[84]	Xia, Y., Wehrli, J., Abivardi, A., Hostiuc, M., Kleim, B., & Bach, D. R. (2024). Attenuating human fear memory retention with minocycline: A randomized placebo-controlled trial. Translational Psychiatry, 14(28), 1-8.
[85]	Yu, H., Siegel, J. Z., Clithero, J. A., & Crockett, M. J. (2021). How peer influence shapes value computation in moral decision-making. Cognition, 211, Article 104641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104641
[86]	Yu, H., Siegel, J. Z., & Crockett, M. J. (2019). Modeling morality in 3‐D: Decision‐making, judgment, and inference. Topics in Cognitive Science, 11(2), 409-432.
[87]	Zapata, J., & Deroy, O. (2023). Ordinary citizens are more severe towards verbal than nonverbal hate-motivated incidents with identical consequences. Scientific Reports, 13(1), Article 7126. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-33892-8
[88]	Zhao, H., & Seibert, S. E. (2006). The big five personality dimensions and entrepreneurial status: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 259-271. pmid: 16551182

效标	A参数	O参数	相关差异检验z	相关差异检验p
伤害行为厌恶效标	0.16^**	0.23^***	−0.90	0.370
伤害结果厌恶效标	0.08	0.23^***	−2.02^*	0.044
共情关注	0.13^*	0.30^***	−2.25^*	0.024
传统道德判断	0.27^***	0.22^***	0.61	0.544
道义主义D参数	0.29^***	0.28^***	0.22	0.830
功利主义U参数	−0.05	−0.01	−0.56	0.579
莱文森精神病态	−0.27^***	−0.42^***	2.07^*	0.038
身体攻击	−0.22^***	−0.22^***	0.05	0.958
口头攻击	−0.09	−0.13^*	0.47	0.638

效标	A参数	O参数	相关差异检验z	相关差异检验p
伤害行为厌恶效标	0.16^**	0.23^***	−0.90	0.370
伤害结果厌恶效标	0.08	0.23^***	−2.02^*	0.044
共情关注	0.13^*	0.30^***	−2.25^*	0.024
传统道德判断	0.27^***	0.22^***	0.61	0.544
道义主义D参数	0.29^***	0.28^***	0.22	0.830
功利主义U参数	−0.05	−0.01	−0.56	0.579
莱文森精神病态	−0.27^***	−0.42^***	2.07^*	0.038
身体攻击	−0.22^***	−0.22^***	0.05	0.958
口头攻击	−0.09	−0.13^*	0.47	0.638

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5
1. A参数	0.57	0.16	−
2. O参数	0.23	0.32	0.09	−
3. 道德推脱	1.99	0.55	−0.17^***	−0.32^***	−
4. 身体攻击	1.84	0.63	−0.16^**	−0.32^***	0.60^***	−
5. 口头攻击	2.60	0.73	−0.05	−0.13^**	0.32^***	0.48^***	−

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5
1. A参数	0.57	0.16	−
2. O参数	0.23	0.32	0.09	−
3. 道德推脱	1.99	0.55	−0.17^***	−0.32^***	−
4. 身体攻击	1.84	0.63	−0.16^**	−0.32^***	0.60^***	−
5. 口头攻击	2.60	0.73	−0.05	−0.13^**	0.32^***	0.48^***	−

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4
1. A参数	0.51	0.16	−
2. O参数	0.25	0.27	0.17	−
3. 道德推脱	2.00	0.58	−0.02	−0.21^*	−
4. 攻击行为	0.48	0.36	−0.01	−0.24^*	0.60^***	−