Abstract
Numerous studies have found that people tend to commit prosocial acts subsequent to previous immoral acts, as a response to the latter. This phenomenon is called moral cleansing or moral compensation. However, the specific mechanism how previous immoral acts motivate moral compensatory behaviors is still not fully understood. This study aimed to examine the roles of guilt and moral identity in the relation between previous immoral acts and subsequent prosocial behaviors to clarify the mechanism. Based on the extant research, the current study proposed a moderated mediation model to illustrate the process of moral cleansing. Specifically, a previous immoral act motivates guilt, which further leads to subsequent prosocial behaviors, while moral identity facilitates this process. The participants were primed by a recalling task (immoral act vs. a neutral event). The results support the hypothesized model and provide a framework that explains moral cleansing by integrating the roles of guilt and moral identity. These findings highlight the dynamic nature of people’s morality with regard to how people adapt moral behaviors to protect their moral self-image.
Highlights
Past research shows us that people behave dishonestly, but at the same time manage to perceive themselves as good and honest (Mazar et al, 2008; Jordan et al, 2011; Shalvi et al, 2015)
The Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to explore the basic relationships between previous immorality, guilt, moral identity, and helping time
Before examining the hypothesized moderated mediation model, we tested the effect of previous immorality on subsequent prosocial behavior using a regression analysis
Summary
Past research shows us that people behave dishonestly, but at the same time manage to perceive themselves as good and honest (Mazar et al, 2008; Jordan et al, 2011; Shalvi et al, 2015). According to the common theoretical model of self-maintenance, people are torn between their wish to be moral and the temptation to profit from dishonesty. This conflict is termed ethical dissonance (Barkan et al, 2012, 2015). Some justifications can take place before people commit the ethical violation, such as ambiguity of rules, the prosocial nature of the act, and moral licensing (Shalvi et al, 2015). They enable people to excuse misbehaviors as less immoral and reduce anticipated ethical dissonance. Other justifications emerge after people’s moral misconduct, in order to minimize the experienced dissonance, wipe out feelings of guilt, and cleanse the self
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
