Higher Shame Makes People Have No Justifications Not to Use Reusable Chopsticks-Investigation on Moral Emotion Types and Levels

Autor: Hui-Shan Huang, 黃慧珊
Rok vydání: 2014
Druh dokumentu: 學位論文 ; thesis
Popis: 102
The present study conducted two researches: the first one adopted a questionnaire survey to explore the justifications why people do not use reusable chopsticks, and the second one used an experimental method, which is a 2X2 factorial experiment, to investigate the effects of moral emotion types (guilt/shame) and level (high/low) on the justifications of not using reusable chopsticks. The results of the first research were as follows: (1) The justifications, based on their frequency, used by people who do not use reusable chopsticks are appeal to higher loyalties, defense of necessity, condemn the condemners, denial of responsibility, appeal to a descriptive norm, denial of victim, denial of injury, economic rationalization, government dependency, the metaphor of the ledger, and economic development reality. (2) Gender and monthly income have no significant influences on “appeal to higher loyalties” while marital status, age, occupation, and education level have significant impacts on “appeal to higher loyalties”. (3) The differences of gender, marital status, age, occupation, education level and monthly income have no significant impacts on “defense of necessity”. (4) Gender, marital status, age, occupation, education level and monthly income all significantly influence “condemn the condemners”. (5) Gender, age, occupation and monthly income have no significant impacts on “denial of responsibility” whereas the variances of marital status and education level significantly influence “denial of responsibility”. (6) Gender has no significant impacts on “appeal to a descriptive norm”, but marital status, age, occupation, education level, and monthly income significantly influence “appeal to a descriptive norm”. (7) Gender, marital status, age, occupation, and monthly income have no significant impacts on “denial of victim” while the differences of education level significantly influence “denial of victim”. (8) Gender has no significant impacts on “denial of injury”, but marital status, age, occupation, education level and monthly income have significant influences on “denial of injury”. (9) Gender, marital status, age, occupation, education level, and monthly income significantly influence “economic rationalisation”. (10) Gender and monthly income have no significant impacts on “government dependency” while marital status, age, occupation, and education level significantly influence “government dependency”. (11) Age, occupation, education level and monthly income have no significant impacts on “the metaphor of the ledger”, but gender and marital status significantly impact “the metaphor of the ledger”. (12) Gender, age, occupation, education level, and monthly income have no significant influences on “economic development reality” whereas marital status significantly impacts “economic development reality”. Moreover, the results of the second research revealed the facts that: (1) The factor “appeal to higher loyalties” of people with high moral emotions is significantly lower than those with low moral emotions. (2) The factor “appeal to higher loyalties” of people with high guilt is significantly lower than those with low guilt. (3) The factor “appeal to higher loyalties” of people with high shame is significantly lower than those with low shame. (4) The factor “defense of necessity” of people with high moral emotions is significantly lower than those with low moral emotions. (5) The factor “defense of necessity” of people with high guilt is significantly lower than those with low guilt. (6) The factor “defense of necessity” of people with high shame is significantly lower than those with low shame. (7) The factor “condemn the condemners” of people with high moral emotions is significantly lower than those with low moral emotions. (8) The factor “condemn the condemners” of people with high guilt is significantly lower than those with low guilt. (9) The factor “condemn the condemners” of people with high shame is significantly lower than those with low shame.
Databáze: Networked Digital Library of Theses & Dissertations