关键词: 道德伪善，双加工，思维方式

Abstract: Moral hypocrisy in the interpersonal level refers to individuals’ judgments of their own immoral behaviors more tolerant than their judgments of the same immoral behaviors which enacted by others. According to the dual process theory of moral judgment, moral hypocrisy involves cognitive process and intuitive process. Moral hypocrisy may be the result of conscious defense and rationalization of one’s own immoral behaviors, which is controlled by cognitive system, while the judgment of others’ immoral behaviors depends on intuitive system. Cognitive process needs cognitive resources and responds slowly, while intuitive process does not need cognitive resources and responds quickly. Meanwhile, the dual-process model of the mind argues that people have two different thinking styles. One is an analytical thinking with high-effort and slow reaction; the other is an intuitive thinking with automatic and quick response. Therefore, in order to explore the impact of intuitive and analytical thinking on moral hypocrisy and to provide empirical support for the dual processing theory of moral hypocrisy, this study read the moral situations of Lammers et al. (2012) for reference and adapted it. In experiment 1, we used 2(with or without time pressure) ×2(moral transgression scenario: self or others) between subject design. The subjects were randomly assigned to time pressure group (intuitive thinking) and without time pressure group (analytical thinking), and then completed the corresponding moral judgment task (moral transgression scenario: self or others, 7-point scale, ranging from 1(extremely wrong) to 7(extremely right)). The results showed that moral hypocrisy existed in the group which without time pressure, that is, participants were more tolerant of themselves than others on moral transgressions, while there was no moral hypocrisy in the time pressure group. The results of experiment 1 showed that the analytical thinking could lead to more moral hypocrisy. In experiment 2, we also used 2(analytic or intuitive thinking training group) ×2(moral transgression scenario: self or others) between subject design, the intuitive thinking and analytical thinking were activated by priming method. The subjects were randomly assigned to different groups, and then completed the moral judgment task (moral transgression scenario: self or others, 7-point scale, ranging from 1(extremely wrong) to 7(extremely right), same as experiment 1)). The results demonstrated that participants acted more moral hypocritical behaviors when priming analytic thinking compared to intuitive thinking, and was identical with experiment 1. The reason might be that: on the one hand, when the subjects on the control of intuitive process, they were lack of cognitive resources, which makes it impossible for subjects to obtain sufficient time to rationalize their behavioral results. Therefore, the judgment will be based more on moral principles and intuition, regardless of whether the actor of the moral behavior is self or others; and when there is no limit on the response time, the cognitive control regains the commanding point, and the individual has enough time and cognitive resources to produce self-service bias, which leads to moral hypocrisy; On the other hand, people have a strong need to maintain their own moral reputation, and try their best to prevent the spread of any words or information that undermines their moral reputation. Beyond reputational concerns, people have an internal need to regard themselves as moral persons and view moral traits as the most essential to the self-image. This explains the subjects in the intuitive thinking group have the same moral judgment for themselves and others, but in the cognitive thinking group, conscious reasoning dominated the intuitive process, producing a more prudent judgment in order to protect their own interest and maintain good moral self-image. The results of our research supported the dual process theory of moral hypocrisy.

Key words: moral hypocrisy, dual process, thinking style