Present research aimed to uncover a postural effect on deontological responding and its boundary condition of dual process. Previous literatures demonstrated a possibility that people have a stronger controlled cognitive process propensity, thus being less deontological in standing than sitting postures, and that this postural effect can be moderated by dual process. We conducted two studies in which participant read dilemma scenarios and rated the morally acceptance and action intention of the utilitarian proposal after each scenario when sitting or standing. The hypothesized postural effect was verified in a field study (Study 1) and also replicated in an experimental study (Study 2). Compared with those in sitting postures, participants in standing postures approved more to the utilitarian proposal and became less deontological. Furthermore, the postural effect was dismissed when participants made moral decisions with a dual task to increase cognitive load and reversed when participants made moral decisions after deliberate consideration of the sacrificial proposal (Study 2). Thus, the postural effect was stable across field and experimental studies and moderated by dual process. The present research supports and extends the dual process morality theory by confirming that body posture can affect moral decision-making, and also offers a novel evidence confirming the moderating role of dual process on embodiment effects. It enriches our knowledge that morality is evolutionarily embodied in postures and dual process can moderate the embodiment effects.
刘传军,廖江群.(2020).Stand up to Action: The Postural Effect on Deontological Responding and the Boundary Condition of Dual Process.[ChinaXiv:201910.00029] (Click&Copy)