得到宽恕与否对冒犯者后续行为的影响：内疚与共情的作用*

心理与行为研究 ›› 2016, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (1): 100-105.

得到宽恕与否对冒犯者后续行为的影响：内疚与共情的作用^*

张田, 傅宏

南京理工大学社会学系,南京 210098 南京师范大学心理学院,南京 210024

收稿日期:2015-07-26 出版日期:2016-01-20 发布日期:2016-02-02
通讯作者: 傅宏,E-mail：fuhong@njnu.edu.cn。
基金资助:
中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金（AE15001_13）和南京理工大学科研启动金项目

Forgiveness Could Reduce the Further Offenses: The Role of Guilt and Empathy

Zhang Tian, Fu Hong

Department of Sociology, Nanjing University of Science & Technology, Nanjing 210098; School of Psychology, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210024

Received:2015-07-26 Online:2016-01-20 Published:2016-02-02

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为考察冒犯者得到宽恕与否对其后续行为的影响,以及在该关系中内疚和共情的作用。本研究采用伤害事件回忆、情境性内疚测查、内疚和羞愧倾向量表和基本共情量表对南京市509名大学生进行调查。结果显示：（1）随着得到宽恕程度的提高,个体在之后善待被冒犯者的程度也随之提高;（2）情境性内疚在得到宽恕与否与后续行为之间起着中介作用;（3）中介效应的直接、前、后路径均受到共情能力的调节。

关键词: 宽恕, 后续行为, 内疚, 共情, 有调节的中介作用。

Abstract: To explore whether forgiveness increase or reduce the further offenses, and the role of guilt and empathy in this relationship, a recall of an offensive event, a measurement of situational guilt, Guilt and Shame Proneness Scale and Basic Empathy Scale were used among 509 college students in Nanjing city. The results show 1)participants were more likely to repeat their transgressions against unforgiving victims than forgiving victims; 2)guilt was found a mediator between forgiveness and the behavior following forgiveness; 3)all the paths of mediation effect were moderated by a moderator empathy.

Key words: forgiveness, behavior after forgiveness, guilt, empathy, moderated mediation.

张田, 傅宏. 得到宽恕与否对冒犯者后续行为的影响：内疚与共情的作用^*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2016, 14(1): 100-105.

Zhang Tian, Fu Hong. Forgiveness Could Reduce the Further Offenses: The Role of Guilt and Empathy[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2016, 14(1): 100-105.

参考文献

1 温忠麟, 叶宝娟.(2014). 有调节的中介模型检验方法: 竞争还是替补? 心理学报, 46(5), 714-726.
2 谢晶, 方平, 姜媛.(2011). 情绪测量方法的研究进展. 心理科学, 34, 488-493.
3 叶浩生.(2004). 文化模式及其对心理与行为的影响. 心理科学, 27, 1032-1036.
4 张田.(2015). “得寸进尺”还是“适可而止”: 基于博弈范式对冒犯者得到宽恕以后行为的研究. 博士学位论文. 南京: 南京师范大学.
5 张田, 丁雪辰, 翁晶, 傅宏, 薛艳.(2014). “得寸进尺” 还是 “适可而止”: 基于冒犯者角度对宽恕结果的讨论. 心理科学进展, 22(1), 104-111.
6 Arimitsu, K.(2002). Structure of guilt eliciting situations in Japanese adolescents. The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 73, 148-156.
7 Baumeister, R. F., Stillwell, A. M., & Heatherton, T. F.(1994). Guilt: An interpersonal approach. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 243-267.
8 Brown, R., & Cehajic, S.(2008). Dealing with the past and facing the future: Mediators of the effects of collective guilt and shame in Bosnia and Herzegovina. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 669-684.
9 Cohen, T. R., Wolf, S. T., Panter, A. T., & Insko, C. A.(2011). Introducing the GASP scale: A new measure of guilt and shame proneness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(5), 947-966.
10 de Hooge, I. E., Nelissen, R. M. A., Breugelmans, S. M., & Zeelenberg, M.(2011). What is moral about guilt? Acting “Prosocially”at the disadvantage of others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 462-473.
11 Doosje, B., Branscombe, N. R., Spears, R., & Manstead, A. S. R.(1998). Guilty by association: When one′s group has a negative history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 872-886.
12 Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S.(2007). Methods for integrating moderation and medation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12, 1-22.
13 Eisenberg, N.(2000). Emotion, regulation and moral development. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 665-697.
14 Fu, H., Watkins, D., & Hui, E. K. P.(2004). Personality correlates of the disposition towards interpersonal forgiveness: A Chinese perspective. International Journal of Psychology, 39, 305-316.
15 Howell, A. J., Turowski, J. B., & Buro, K.(2012). Guilt, empathy, and apology. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 917-922.
16 Iyer, A., Leach, C. W., & Crosby, F. J.(2003). White guilt and racial compensation: The benefits and limits of self-focus. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 117-129.
17 Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P.(2006). Development and validation of the Basic Empathy Scale. Journal of Adolescence, 29(4), 589-611.
18 Kelln, B. R. C., & Ellard, J. H.(1999). An equity theory analysis of the impact of forgiveness and retribution on transgressor compliance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 864-872.
19 Leith, K. P., & Baumeister, R. F.(1998). Empathy, shame, guilt, and narratives of interpersonal conflicts: Guilt-prone people are better at perspective taking. Journal of Personality, 66, 1-37.
20 McGarty, C., Pederson, A., Leach, C. W., Mansell, T., Waller, J., & Bliuc, A.-M.(2005). Group-based guilt as a predictor of commitment to apology. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 659-680.
21 McNulty, J. K.(2008). Forgiveness in marriage: Putting the benefits into context. Journal of Family Psychology, 22(1), 171.
22 McNulty, J. K.(2010). Forgiveness increases the likelihood of subsequent partner transgressions in marriage. Journal of Family Psychology, 24(6), 787.
23 McNulty, J. K.(2011). The dark side of forgiveness: The tendency to forgive predicts continued psychological and physical aggression in marriage. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(6), 770-783.
24 Tangney, J. P.(1991). Moral affect: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 598-607.
25 Tangney, J. P., Stueweg, J., & Mashek, D. J.(2007). Moral emotions and moral behaviour. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 345-372.
26 Turner, J. H., & Stets, J. E.(2006). Moral emotions. In J. E. Stets & J. H. Turner(Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of emotions.(pp. 545-566). New York: Springer.
27 Wallace, H. M., Exline, J. J., & Baumeister, R. F.(2008). Interpersonal consequences of forgiveness: Does forgiveness deter or encourage repeat offenses? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 453-460
28 Zhong, J., Wang, C., Li, J., & Liu, J.(2009). Penn State Worry Questionnaire: Structure and psychometric properties of the Chinese version. Journal of Zhejiang University Science B, 10(3), 211-218.

[1]	钟伟芳, 郭永兴. 悲伤表情识别能力影响疼痛共情—一项ERP研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(5): 585-592.
[2]	李娇娇, 刘晓冰, 裴丹丹, 徐碧波, 尹锡杨. 情绪智力对大学生恶意创造力的影响：一个有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(4): 563-569.
[3]	罗利, 杨东, 陈圣栋, 高伟, 陈永强, 袁加锦. 特质敬畏对亲社会倾向的正向预测：自我超越和共情的多重中介作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(3): 390-396.
[4]	郭英, 陈灿杰, 胡东, 袁安怡. 道德认同对大学生亲社会行为倾向的影响：共情的中介作用和正念的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(1): 80-87.
[5]	颜志强, 李珊. 共情和抑郁的关系：同伴关系的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(3): 424-430.
[6]	高玲, 花苏晴, 李沛沛, 杨继平, 王兴超. 同胞关系与青少年亲社会行为：道德推脱的中介作用和共情的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(2): 216-222.
[7]	孙卉, 张田. 宽恕干预对降低农村留守儿童拒绝敏感性的作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(1): 111-117.
[8]	张振. 自恋与攻击行为的关系：观点采择和共情关注的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(1): 131-136.
[9]	宋娟, 杜梦, 连涛, 张倩. 积极怀旧情绪对疼痛共情影响的ERP研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(4): 466-473.
[10]	谭千保, 李佳圆, 刘旭. 累积生态风险对农村初中生攻击行为的影响：有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(4): 489-495.
[11]	衡书鹏, 赵换方, 熊建萍, 周宗奎. 网络募捐中求助者的面部表情对捐助意愿的影响：有中介的调节模型[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(1): 92-99.
[12]	李甜甜, 王娟娟, 顾吉有, 徐鹤文. 二胎出生对头胎儿童共情能力的影响：父母教养能力感的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(6): 810-816.
[13]	宋娟, 魏艳秋, 杜梦, 解鸿宇, 连涛, 胡亚奇, 马欧. 眼部情绪信息对疼痛共情影响的ERP研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(3): 326-332,347.
[14]	王璐, 宋娟, 魏艳秋, 解鸿宇, 彭瑶, 张静达. 初中生家庭环境与攻击性的关系：共情的中介作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(2): 216-222.
[15]	张田, 傅宏. “对不起”有用吗：道歉对群际宽恕的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(1): 119-125.