7 research outputs found
Hedonic tone and negative affect suppression: A conditional indirect pathway to delay dscounting
This study examined how pleasure predisposition and self-regulation influence discounting behavior, the devaluing of delayed rewards. It examined how low regard for future reward (i.e. anticipatory anhedonia) and how the control of negative emotion (i.e. emotion regulation) influence the preference for smaller-sooner reward than larger-later reward (i.e. discounting). It was hypothesized that low anticipatory wanting and employing suppression promotes greater discounting behavior whereas employing reappraisal inhibits discounting behavior. The data were collected from 206 participants and analyzed using H y s Process macro SPSS. The results showed a conditional indirect pathway leading to discounting. The findings suggest that the individuals with dispositional trait anticipatory anhedonia discount greater if they suppress their emotion when feeling down. Basing from the assumption that greater discounting arises after a cognitively effortful task, suppressing negative emotion as a cognitively effortful task, has shown to promote greater discounting. It has become more effortful to individuals with anticipatory anhedonia for demonstrating blunted negative reaction. In other words, the depletion of cognitive resources was not necessarily due to the amount of affect regulated, but with more effort involved in self-monitoring during the suppression blunted affect. The depleted executive control resulted to decreased attention for weighing both larger later and smaller sooner option. Decreased attention resources led to a tendency to prefer smaller sooner reward. The study suggests that individuals with anticipatory anhedonia discount greater when suppressing their blunted negative affect
Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample
The study of moral judgements often centres on moral dilemmas in which options consistent with deontological perspectives (that is, emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with options consistent with utilitarian judgements (that is, following the greater good based on consequences). Greene et al. (2009) showed that psychological and situational factors (for example, the intent of the agent or the presence of physical contact between the agent and the victim) can play an important role in moral dilemma judgements (for example, the trolley problem). Our knowledge is limited concerning both the universality of these effects outside the United States and the impact of culture on the situational and psychological factors affecting moral judgements. Thus, we empirically tested the universality of the effects of intent and personal force on moral dilemma judgements by replicating the experiments of Greene et al. in 45 countries from all inhabited continents. We found that personal force and its interaction with intention exert influence on moral judgements in the US and Western cultural clusters, replicating and expanding the original findings. Moreover, the personal force effect was present in all cultural clusters, suggesting it is culturally universal. The evidence for the cultural universality of the interaction effect was inconclusive in the Eastern and Southern cultural clusters (depending on exclusion criteria). We found no strong association between collectivism/individualism and moral dilemma judgements
Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample.
From PubMed via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2019-04-15, accepted 2022-02-14Publication status: aheadofprintThe study of moral judgements often centres on moral dilemmas in which options consistent with deontological perspectives (that is, emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with options consistent with utilitarian judgements (that is, following the greater good based on consequences). Greene et al. (2009) showed that psychological and situational factors (for example, the intent of the agent or the presence of physical contact between the agent and the victim) can play an important role in moral dilemma judgements (for example, the trolley problem). Our knowledge is limited concerning both the universality of these effects outside the United States and the impact of culture on the situational and psychological factors affecting moral judgements. Thus, we empirically tested the universality of the effects of intent and personal force on moral dilemma judgements by replicating the experiments of Greene et al. in 45 countries from all inhabited continents. We found that personal force and its interaction with intention exert influence on moral judgements in the US and Western cultural clusters, replicating and expanding the original findings. Moreover, the personal force effect was present in all cultural clusters, suggesting it is culturally universal. The evidence for the cultural universality of the interaction effect was inconclusive in the Eastern and Southern cultural clusters (depending on exclusion criteria). We found no strong association between collectivism/individualism and moral dilemma judgements. [Abstract copyright: © 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.
Publisher correction: Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample
Correction to: Nature Human Behaviour https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01319-5, published online 14 April 2022
Publisher Correction: Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample.
From PubMed via Jisc Publications RouterPublication status: aheadofprin
Publisher correction:Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample
Correction to: Nature Human Behaviour https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01319-5, published online 14 April 2022