道德具身性的元分析研究
A Meta-Analysis of the Moral Embodied Cognition
-
摘要: 具身认知强调身体的感知觉在认知过程中发挥着重要的作用。有研究者将物理变量的改变使得人们的道德行为和道德判断发生变化这一探讨方向命名为“道德的心理物理学”。元分析研究的目的在于探讨个体的感知觉与道德行为和道德判断之间是否存在联系，以及这种效应是否受到某些变量的影响。元分析纳入42个研究，共包含2962名被试。研究结果表明道德的具身认知效应显著，具体感知觉与道德行为和道德判断之间存在相关(r = 0.19, p < 0.01)。“被试来源国家”这一变量的调节作用显著(Q = 79.454, df = 41, p < 0.001)。Abstract: Embodied cognition emphasizes our body's important role in human cognitive process. Researchers have termed the form of physical variables altering an individual's moral behavior and moral judgment as "moral psychophysics". This article reports the results of a meta-analysis of individual perception's relationship with one's moral behavior and moral judgment, and whether this affiliation is moderated by any subsidiary variables. Significance tests and moderator analyses were performed through random-effect models. The combined effect size for the relation between individual perceptions, moral judgment and moral behavior was weakly correlated (r=0.19, p < 0.01). Variables such as the directions, cognitive activities, perceptions, moral metaphors and Western or Eastern cultures did not show significant moderation effects. However, if the cultures are not merely classified by Western or Eastern and is rater specifically categorized as "country culture", a moderation effect was found (Q = 79.454, p < 0.001).
-
Key words:
- moral behavior /
- moral judgment /
- embodied cognition /
- meta-analysis
-
表 1 入选研究的基本资料和效果大小
作者(一作) 被试量 研究内容 分类 国籍 结果 效果大小(r) P 道德行为 Zhong(2010) 84 明亮度对道德行为的影响 在线 美国 正性 0.473 0.000 50 明亮度对道德行为的影响 在线 美国 正性 0.275 0.042 83 明亮度对道德行为的影响 在线 美国 正性 0.293 0.006 Banerjee(2012) 40 道德行为影响明亮度的判断 离线 美国 正性 0.306 0.041 74 道德行为影响明亮度的需要 离线 美国 正性 0.299 0.007 Chiou(2013) 54 明亮度对道德行为的影响 在线 中国 正性 0.276 0.034 58 明亮度对道德行为的影响 在线 中国 正性 0.298 0.017 48 明亮度对道德行为的影响 在线 中国 正性 0.339 0.012 Steidle(2013) 80 明亮度对道德行为的影响 离线 德国 负性 -0.244 0.024 58 明亮度对道德行为的影响 在线 德国 负性 -0.324 0.009 48 明亮度对道德行为的影响 在线 德国 负性 -0.296 0.030 62 明亮度对道德行为的影响 离线 德国 负性 -0.299 0.015 Webster(2012) 30 明亮度对道德行为的影响 在线 美国 正性 0.500 0.004 30 明亮度对道德行为的影响 在线 美国 正性 0.350 0.050 Liljenquist(2010) 28 干净的气味影响道德行为 在线 美国 正性 0.460 0.007 99 干净的气味影响道德行为 在线 美国 正性 0.228 0.019 Lee(2010) 82 道德行为影响清洁的需要 离线 美国 正性 0.345 0.001 Fayard(2009) 210 道德行为影响清洁的需要 离线 美国 负性 -0.030 0.633 Zhong(2006) 60 道德行为影响清洁的需要 离线 美国 正性 0.144 0.040 45 道德行为影响清洁的需要 离线 美国 正性 0.358 0.030 32 道德行为影响清洁的需要 离线 美国 正性 0.470 0.032 Gáme(2011) 47 道德行为影响清洁的需要 离线 西班牙 负性 -0.044 0.762 36 道德行为影响清洁的需要 离线 西班牙 负性 -0.036 0.828 45 道德行为影响清洁的需要 离线 西班牙 负性 0.149 0.332 Ackerma(2010) 43 重量影响道德行为 在线 美国 正性 0.431 0.001 Eskine(2012) 60 道德行为影响味觉 在线 美国 正性 0.289 0.050 Williams(2008) 53 温度影响道德行为 在线 美国 正性 0.518 0.000 Skarlicki(2013) 76 道德行为对味觉的影响 离线 美国 正性 0.264 0.016 136 道德行为对味觉的影响 离线 美国 正性 0.237 0.021 119 道德行为对嗅觉的影响 离线 美国 正性 0.193 0.033 Lee(2012) 34 嗅觉对道德行为的影响 在线 美国 正性 0.384 0.005 46 嗅觉对道德行为的影响 在线 美国 正性 0.418 0.000 道德判断 Schnall(2008) 40 干净对道德判断的影响 离线 英国 正性 0.290 0.054 44 干净对道德判断的影响 在线 英国 正性 0.390 0.008 Eskine(2011) 53 味觉对道德判断的影响 在线 美国 正性 0.509 0.000 Zhong (2010) 58 干净对道德判断的影响 在线 美国 正性 0.268 0.033 323 干净对道德判断的影响 在线 美国 正性 0.148 0.017 136 干净对道德判断的影响 在线 美国 正性 0.181 0.030 赵伯妮(2009) 70 味觉对道德判断的影响 在线 中国 负性 -0.060 0.623 66 味觉对道德判断的影响 在线 中国 负性 -0.100 0.426 62 味觉对道德判断的影响 在线 中国 负性 -0.080 0.538 Helzer(2011) 60 干净对道德判断的影响 离线 美国 正性 0.360 0.004 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 总体效应值和同质性检验
研究数 被试量 效应值(r) 95%CI Fail-safe N Q df 42 2948 0.193** 0.1223-0.260 1011 147.576** 41
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 调节变量
调节变量 研究数 被试量 效果大小(r) 95%CI Q 方向 0.045 具体到抽象 28 1 900 0.197** 0.102-0.289 抽象到具体 14 1 062 0.183** 0.089-0.274 类别 1.488 在线 22 1 748 0.234** 0.126-0.338 离线 20 1 214 0.149** 0.061-0.234 感觉通道 5.604 肤觉 17 1314 0.220** 0.122-0.314 味觉 6 327 0.095 -0.038-0.225 视觉 14 859 0.162* -0.007-0.322 嗅觉 5 462 0.293** 0.184-0.394 被试来源国家 79.454** 美国 27 2 144 0.282** 0.223-0.340 德国 4 248 -0.287** -0.395-0.171 中国 6 358 0.112 -0.061-0.279 西班牙 3 128 -0.077 -0.247-0.098 英国 2 84 0.341** 0.138-0.515 隐喻类型 0.604 明亮度 11 799 0.123 -0.087-0.322 干净 21 1 345 0.209** 0.136-0.266
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 李其维. (2008).认知革命与第二代认知科学刍议.心理学报, 40(12), 1306－1327. http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/xlxb200812009 [2] 彭凯平, 喻丰. (2012).道德的心理物理学:现象、机制与意义.中国社会科学, 12, 28-45. http://lib.cqvip.com/qk/81908X/201212/44261008.html [3] 伍秋萍, 冯聪, 陈斌斌. (2011).具身框架下的社会认知研究述评.心理科学进展, 19(3), 336-345. http://www.oalib.com/paper/4921569 [4] 薛灿灿. (2012).具身认知理论的思考——以身体接触对喜爱度的影响为例.硕士学位论文, 南京师范大学. [5] 叶浩生. (2013).心智具身性:来自不同学科的证据.社会科学, 5, 117-128. http://www.cqvip.com/QK/81054X/201305/45653161.html [6] 殷融, 曲方炳, 叶浩生. (2012).具身概念表征的研究及理论述评.心理科学进展, 20(9), 1372-1381. http://edu.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/Detail/dxtsgxb201406016 [7] 赵伯妮. (2009).味觉和道德判断:情绪与自我概念的作用.硕士学位论文, 西北大学. [8] Ackerman, J. M., Nocera, C. C., & Bargh, J. A. (2010). Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions. Science, 328(5986), 1712-1715. doi: 10.1126/science.1189993 [9] Banerjee, P., Chatterjee, P., & Sinha, J. (2012). Is it light or dark? Recalling moral behavior changes perception of brightness. Psychological Science, 23(4), 407-409. doi: 10.1177/0956797611432497 [10] Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617-645. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639 [11] Barsalou, L. W. (2009). Simulation, situated conceptualization, and prediction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1521), 1281-1289. http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/364/1521/1281 [12] Barsalou, L. W., Simmons, W. K., Barbey, A. K., & Wilson, C. D. (2003). Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(2), 84-91. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)00029-3 [13] Brouillet, T., Heurley, L., Martin, S., & Brouillet, D. (2010). The embodied cognition theory and the motor component of "yes" and "no" verbal responses. Acta Psychologica, 134(3), 310-317. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.03.003 [14] Chapman, H. A., Kim, D. A., Susskind, J. M., & Anderson, A. K. (2009). In bad taste: Evidence for the oral origins of moral disgust. Science, 323(5918), 1222-1226. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/323/5918/1222 [15] Chiou, W. B., & Cheng, Y. Y. (2013). In broad daylight, we trust in God! Brightness, the salience of morality, and ethical behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 37-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.07.005 [16] Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 [17] Cohen, D., & Leung, A. K. Y. (2009). The hard embodiment of culture. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39(7), 1278-1289. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.v39:7 [18] *Eskine, K. J., Kacinik, N. A., & Prinz, J. J. (2011). A bad taste in the mouth gustatory disgust influences moral judgment. Psychological Science, 22(3), 295-299. doi: 10.1177/0956797611398497 [19] Eskine, K. J., Kacinik, N. A., & Webster, G. D. (2012). The bitter truth about morality: Virtue, not vice, makes a bland beverage taste nice. PloS one, 7(7), e41159. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0041159 [20] Fayard, J. V., Bassi, A. K., Bernstein, D. M., & Roberts, B. W. (2009). Is cleanliness next to godliness? Dispelling old wives' tales: Failure to replicate Zhong and Liljenquist (2006). Journal of Articles in Support of the Null Hypothesis, 6, 21-29. https://core.ac.uk/display/21725044 [21] Gámez, E., Díaz, J. M., & Marrero, H. (2011). The uncertain universality of the Macbeth effect with a Spanish sample. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 14, 156-162. doi: 10.5209/rev_SJOP.2011.v14.n1.13 [22] Griffit, W., & Veitch, R. (1971). Hot and crowded. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17, 92-98. doi: 10.1037/h0030458 [23] Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail. Psychological Review, 108, 814-834. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.814 [24] Haidt, J., & Algoe, S. (2004). Moral amplification and the emotions that attach us to saints and demons. In J. Greenberg, S. L. Koole, & P. Tom (Eds.), Handbook of Experimental Existential Psychology. New York: Guilford. [25] Helzer, E. G., & Pizarro, D. A. (2011). Dirty liberals! Reminders of physical cleanliness influence moral and political attitudes. Psychological science, 22(4), 517-522. doi: 10.1177/0956797611402514 [26] Hofstede, G., & McCrae, R. R. (2004). Personality and culture revisited: Linking traits and dimensions of culture. Cross-Cultural Research, 38(1), 52-88. doi: 10.1177/1069397103259443 [27] Hong, Y., & Chiu, C. (2001). Toward a paradigm shift: From cross-cultural differences in social cognition to social-cognitive mediation of cultural differences. Social Cognition, 19(3: Special issue), 181-196. doi: 10.1521/soco.19.3.181.21471 [28] Kohlberg, L., Levine, C., & Hewer, A. (1983). Moral stages: A current formulation and a response to critics. New York: Krager. [29] Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [30] Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books. [31] Landau, M. J., Meier, B. P., & Keefer, L. A. (2010). A metaphor-enriched social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1045. doi: 10.1037/a0020970 [32] *Lee, S. W., & Schwarz, N. (2010). Dirty hands and dirty mouths embodiment of the moral-purity metaphor is specific to the motor modality involved in moral transgression. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1423-1425. doi: 10.1177/0956797610382788 [33] *Lee, S. W., & Schwarz, N. (2012). Bidirectionality, mediation, and moderation of metaphorical effects: The embodiment of social suspicion and fishy smells. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(5), 737-749. doi: 10.1037/a0029708 [34] Li, Q. W. (2008). Cognitive revolution and second-generation cognitive science (in Chinese). Acta Psychologica Sinica, 40(12), 1306-1327. http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-XLXB200812012.htm [35] Liljenquist, K., Zhong, C. B., & Galinsky, A. D. (2010). The smell of virtue clean scents promote reciprocity and charity. Psychological Science, 21(3), 381-383. doi: 10.1177/0956797610361426 [36] Meier, B. P., Sellbom, M., & Wygant, D. B. (2007). Failing to take the moral high ground: Psychopathy and the vertical representation of morality. Personality and individual differences, 43(4), 757-767. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.02.001 [37] Meyer-Lindenberg, A. (2008). Trust me on this. Science, 321, 778-780. doi: 10.1126/science.1162908 [38] Niedenthal, P. M., Barsalou, L. W., Winkielman, P., Krauth-Gruber, S., & Ric, F. (2005). Embodiment in social perception and emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 184?211. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0903_1 [39] Page, R., & Moss, M. (1976). Environmental influences on aggression: The effects of darkness and proximity of victim. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 6(2), 126-133. doi: 10.1111/jasp.1976.6.issue-2 [40] Piaget, J. (1952).The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Univ. Press. [41] *Schnall, S., Benton, J., & Harvey, S. (2008). With a clean conscience cleanliness reduces the severity of moral judgments. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1219-1222. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02227.x [42] *Sherman, G. D., & Clore, G. L. (2009). The color of sin white and black are perceptual symbols of moral purity and pollution. Psychological Science. 20(8), 1019-1026. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02403.x [43] Skarlicki, D. P., Hoegg, J., Aquino, K., & Nadisic, T. (2013). Does injustice affect your sense of taste and smell? The mediating role of moral disgust. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 49(5), 582-859. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277446964_Does_injustice... [44] Smith, L. B. (2005). Cognition as a dynamic system: Principles from embodiment. Developmental Review. 25, 278-298. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2005.11.001 [45] Slepian, M. L., & Ambady, N. (2014). Simulating sensorimotor metaphors: Novel metaphors influence embodied cognition. Cognition, 130(3), 309-314. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.11.006 [46] Steidle, A., Hanke, E. V., & Werth, L. (2013). In the dark we cooperate: The situated nature of procedural embodiment. Social Cognition, 31(2), 275-300. doi: 10.1521/soco.2013.31.2.275 [47] *Webster, G. D., Urland, G. R., & Correll, J. (2012). Can uniform color color aggression? Quasi-experimental evidence from professional ice hockey. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(3), 274-281. doi: 10.1177/1948550611418535 [48] Williams, L. E., & Bargh, J. A. (2008). Experiencing physical warmth promotes interpersonal warmth. Science, 322(5901), 606-607. http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2737341?pdf=render [49] Williams, L. E., Huang, J. Y., & Bargh, J. A. (2009). The scaffolded mind: Higher mental processes are grounded in early experience of the physical world. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39(7), 1257-1267. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.v39:7 [50] Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 625-636. doi: 10.3758/BF03196322 [51] Wu. Q. P., Feng, C., & Chen, B. B. (2011). Embodiment in Social Cognition. Advances in Psychological Science. 19(3), 336-345.] http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-XLXD201103007.htm [52] Xue, C. C. (2012). The consideration of embodied cognition——example of physical contact effect on the degree of like. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Nanjing Normal University. [53] Ye, H. S. (2012). The Embodiment of Mind: Evidences from Multiple Disciplines. Journal of Social Sciences. 5, 117-128. http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/04/02/0956797611429801.abstract?cited-by=yesp0956797611429801v1 [54] Yin, R., Qu, F. B., & Ye, H, S. (2012). Conceptual Metaphor Theory: Basing on Theories of Embodied Cognition. Advances in Psychological Science. 20(9), 1372-1381. http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-XLXD201302008.htm [55] Zhao, B. N. (2009). Taste and moral judgment: the role of emotion and self-concept. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Northwest University. [56] Zhong, C. B., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2008). Cold and lonely does social exclusion literally feel cold? Psychological Science, 19(9), 838-842. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02165.x [57] Zhong, C. B., & Liljenquist, K. A. (2006). Washing away your sins: Threatened morality and physical cleansing. Science, 313, 1451-1452. doi: 10.1126/science.1130726 [58] Zhong, C. B., Bohns, V. K., & Gino, F. (2010). Good lamps are the best police: Darkness increases dishonesty and self-interested behavior. Psychological Science, 21(3), 311-314. doi: 10.1177/0956797609360754 -
点击查看大图
图(1) / 表(3)
计量
- 文章访问数: 177
- HTML全文浏览量: 162
- PDF下载量: 0
- 被引次数: 0