大學生關懷與正義兩難情境思維判斷之研究

The Study of College Students' Moral Judgment on Care vs Justice Dilemmas

黃崇恩(Chung-En Huang)；陳煥文(Huan-Wen Chen)

正義 ； 道德思維 ； 道德判斷兩難 ； 關懷 ； justice ； moral reasoning ； moral dilemmas ； care

教育學誌

48期（2022 / 11 / 01）

41 - 68

繁體中文

本研究使用自編符合日常生活脈絡情境的「關懷與正義思維兩難情境量表」來探討該量表的心理計量特徵，並瞭解台灣大學生在關懷與正義思維兩難情境的道德思維判斷傾向，以及探討個人在不同情境下，因親疏遠近的不同關係所做的道德判斷反應組型的特徵。根據203位受試者的實徵資料，量表透過因素分析，得到「機會資源分配偏愛」和「侵權傷害偏愛」等兩個因素。而資料顯示台灣大學生整體而言略微傾向於關懷思維取向，且受試者會因為不同情境、不同的親疏遠近的關係、是否置身其中，而有不同的反應。整體跨情境平均而言，對摯友、兄弟姊妹、父母的關係，有60%至65%的受試者作出關懷判斷，而對普通朋友則驟降至25%，形成明顯的分界線。

The purpose of this research is to employ a scale of daily life dilemmas about care vs justice conflicts to explore the psychometric properties of the scale and understand the tendency of college students' moral reasoning about care vs justice dilemmas. This study also investigated the effect of relations with different intimacy distance on the characteristics of the response patterns of subjects' moral judgments under different situations. Based on empirical data of 203 subjects, two factors, namely positive favoring of resource distribution and partiality toward acts of infringement of rights, were extracted from factor analysis. The results indicated that the performance of college students on the scale, in general, tended to be slightly care-oriented. In addition, subjects' responses would vary depending on the different situations of dilemmas and relations of intimacy distance. Whether respondents are situated in the dilemmas may also have effects on generating different responses. The proportions of making care judgments range, on average, from 60% to 65% across different situations for the relations of close friends, siblings, and parents. The proportions of making care judgments decrease quickly to 25% for the relation of normal friends, forming a clear-cut boundary line with those obtained from the relations of close friends, siblings, and parents.

1. 黃光國, K.-K.(1998)。兩種道德：臺灣社會中道德思維研究的再詮釋。本土心理學研究，9，121-175。
   連結：
2. Baron, J.,Ritov, I.,Greene, J. D.(2013).The duty to support nationalistic policies.Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,26(2),128-138.
3. Chen, H. W.(2014).A two-dimensional theoretical framework for the assessment of moral judgment.40th Annual Conference of the Association of Moral Education,Pasadena, U.S.A:
4. Chen, H. W.(2014).The measurement of care versus justice: Devising a moral judgment test for measuring the moral boundary of individuals.40th Annual Conference of the Association of Moral Education,Pasadena, U.S.A:
5. Colby, A.,Kohlberg, L.(1987).The measurement of moral judgment: Theoretical foundations and research validation.Cambridge University Press.
6. Dworkin, R.(1978).Taking rights seriously.Harvard University Press.
7. Gilligan, C.(1982).In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development.Harvard University Press.
8. Hwang, K. K.(1998).Two moralities: Reinterpreting the findings of empirical research on moral reasoning in Taiwan.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,1(3),211-238.
9. Kohlberg, L.(1981).Essays on moral development: The philosophy of moral development.Harper & Row.
10. Mischel, T.(ed.)(1971).Cognitive development and epistemology.Academic Press.
11. Noddings, N.(1984).Caring: A feminine approach to ethics & moral education.University of California Press.
12. Nunner-Winkler, G.(1984).Two moralities? A critical discussion of an ethic of care and responsibility versus an ethic of rights and justice.Morality, moral behavior, and moral development
13. Rawls, J.(1971).A theory of justice.Harvard University Press.
14. Sandel, M. J.(2009).Justice: What's the right thing to do ?.Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
15. Shweder, R.(1982).Liberalism as destiny.Contemporary Psychology,27,421-424.
16. Yacker, N.,Weinberg, S. L.(1990).Care and justice moral orientation: A scale for its assessment.Journal of Personality Assessment,55(1-2),18-27.
17. 危芷芬, Z.-F.,黃光國, K.-K.(1998)。積極義務與消極義務：台美大學生道德判斷的文化比較研究。中華心理學刊，40(2)，137-153。
18. 林明地, M.-D.(2006)。Nel Noddings 關懷倫理學及在學校領導的應用。教育政策論壇，2，101-128。
19. 葉紹國, S.-G.(1996)。道德推理中關懷導向與正義導向思考之區辨及其在中國社會實踐的特徵。本土心理學研究，5，264-311。
20. 戴華, H.(2001)。姬莉根的關懷倫理與康德的道德觀點。2001 台灣哲學會學術研討會，新竹市，臺灣=Hsinchu, Taiwan:
21. 簡成熙, C.-X.(2001)。個人自主，社群意識與關懷德性：自由主義普遍性公民身份觀的修正。屏東師院學報，14，75-112。