日常生活中的道德困境抉擇：道德原則與行為結果的考量

Principle- or Consequence-Based Decision Making in Real-life Moral Dilemma

郭維宸(Wei-Chen Kuo)

指導教授 ： 林文瑛

中原大學/理學院/心理學研究所/碩士(2013年)

https://doi.org/10.6840/CYCU.2013.00142

摘要

Piaget研究個體在道德困境下的判斷，發現兒童對於行為的判斷由最初注重具體的結果，隨著年齡增長而轉變為能掌握行為者的意圖。Kohlberg延續Piaget道德判斷議題的研究，發展出六階段道德發展理論，該理論認為個體道德判斷的發展趨勢是以行為結果為重的思考模式，隨著認知能力增強而轉變為著重道德原則的思考模式。當個體越傾向使用道德原則作為思考依據時，其道德的層次越高。但後續的研究發現個體的道德判斷還受到觀點差異與性別的影響，在觀點差異的部分，過去研究觀點差異對個體道德判斷的研究得到了三種不同的研究結果，第一種研究結果認為個體在自己觀點比他人觀點有較多的結果考量；第二種研究結果認為個體在自己觀點比他人觀點有較多原則考量；第三種研究結果則認為個體在自己觀點與他人觀點的考量無差異。在性別的部分，Kohlberg認為道德階段的成長代表個體對原則性思考的理解增加，但Gilligan卻認為女生傾向以關懷的角度看待困境，注重關係的維護與反應他人需求，因此女生偏向注重結果考量。因為以往在研究認知發展、觀點差異與年齡等因素對個體的道德判斷的影響並未得到一致性的結果，因此，本研究利用兩則道德困境（實話困境/簽名困境）當作研究材料，試圖在實驗一探討兩個部分，第一，當個體站在自己/他人觀點判斷相同的道德困境時，個體的行為是依據道德原則，或是行為結果進行判斷，此外，研究者亦探討年齡或性別的因素是否會影響個體的判斷。第二，以往對於觀點差異的研究使用不同的方式得到了三種不同的研究結果，而研究者在本次實驗藉由相同的困境做為實驗材料，試圖了解本次研究傾向支持何種研究結果。；實驗二延續實驗一的研究結果，探討個體採用道德原則或是行為結果作為行為的依據，在知道行為的實際結果後，對於行為的重新抉擇是否有差異。
實驗一的結果與原先預期並不一致，多數參與者傾向以道德原則為行為依據，但在他人觀點下行為結果考量的比例有增加的趨勢，這或許反映出了參與者以他人觀點看待困境時，認為他人在困境中應該怎麼做，但是實際上可能考量了其他因素而做不到，因此實驗一的結果傾向支持個體有自以為是的偏誤。實驗二的結果符合原先的假設，以道德原則為行為依據的個體，當結果為不好的情形時，傾向不改變原先抉擇。以行為結果作為行為依據的個體，當結果訊息與個體原先預期不同，則參與者傾向改變原先抉擇。可能原因為個體為了讓自己減少失調帶來的不舒服感受，個體會透過改變或增強原先行為讓自己達到認知平衡，因此以行為結果為依據的個體，在面臨結果與原先預期不同時，行為抉擇的改變比例將會高於以道德原則為行為依據的個體。

關鍵字

道德抉擇

並列摘要

In Piaget’s research, individual judgment in moral dilemma, he found that children from the initial judgment for behavior focus on specific results. With age, they could know the intention of the actors. Kohlberg continued Piaget’s moral judgment study, developed a six-stage theory of moral development. The theory is that the development trend of individual moral judgments based on behavioral consequences as the most important mode of thinking. Individuals will be higher level of their moral when they tend to use more as a thinking based on moral principles. But following studies have found individual moral judgments are influenced by differences of perspective and gender. In the differences of perspective side, past researches about perspective obtained three different approaches. The First approach concluded that the individuals have more consequence in self perspective than in others perspective. The second approach concluded that individuals have more principle in self perspective than in others perspective. The last one concluded there’s no difference between self and others perspective. In the gender side, Kohlberg thought that the growth of moral stage means one has more understanding about principle thinking. But Gilligan thought female are tend to deal with the dilemma with care perspective, focusing on the relationship between maintenance and response needs of others. Therefore, female are tend to consider consequence. In previous research of moral judgment influenced by cognitive development, different perspective and gender of age has not been consistent results. Hence, this study uses two moral dilemmas (truth dilemma/ signature dilemma ) as research materials. In experiment one, researcher investigates attempt to explore two parts, first, individuals behavior are based on moral principle or behavioral consequence when they standing on their own / others’ perspective. In addition, the researcher also investigates whether age or gender factors that may affect the individual's judgment. Second, in the past research of perspective obtained three approaches by different methods, so researcher uses the same dilemmas as research base to understand which approach tend to be supported by this experiment. Experiment two extended the results of experiment one, to investigate that individuals who use moral principles or behavioral consequence as behavior basis, whether their re-choice of behavior will be different when they know the actual consequence or not.
The results of experiment one are not consistent with the original hypothesizes, most participants tend to use moral principle as behavior basis. However, in consideration of others perspective, the proportion of consequence basis has increased trend. It may reflect when participants stand on others perspective, they think that others should act in the dilemma; however they may consider other factors and lead to fail. Therefore, the results tend to support individual has self-righteous bias in the experimental one. In the other hand, experiment two results meet the original hypothesizes. Individuals who take moral principle as behavior basis won’t change their choices even they recognize the outcome are bad messages. Individuals who take behavioral consequence as behavior basis will tend to change their original decision once the results come bad. Possible reasons for individuals to reduce the uncomfortable feelings caused by cognitive dissonance, they achieve their cognitive balanced by changing or reinforcing original behavior. Therefore, individuals who use consequence as behavior basis have higher changing rate than whose use moral principle as behavior basis when the results are not the same with the original expectations.

並列關鍵字

moral decision-making

參考文獻

蘇永明（民85）。郭耳堡（L. Kohlberg）的道德認知發展論評析。教育研究集刊，37，155-170。

Armsby, R. E. （1971）. A reexamination of the development of moral judgments in children. Child Development, 1241-1248.

Blasi, A. （1980）. Bridging moral cognition and moral action: A critical review of the literature. Psychological Bulletin, 88（1）, 1.

Carpendale, J. I., & Krebs, D. L. （1995）. Variations in level of moral judgment as a function of type of dilemma and moral choice. Journal of Personality, 63（2）, 289-313.

Chandler, M. J., Greenspan, S., & Barenboim, C. （1973）. Judgments of intentionality in response to videotaped and verbally presented moral dilemmas: The medium is the message. Child Development, 315-320.