Acceso usuarios
The experience of regulatory fit shapes subsequent moral conduct by intensifying moral predispositions. Results of seven studies (n = 3,559) show that individuals experiencing regulatory fit versus nonfit are more likely to behave in manners consistent with their moral predispositions as assessed by the trait Moral Disengagement scale, the Machiavellianism scale, and the Honesty–Humility Subscale of the HEXACO-60 inventory. Following an experience of regulatory fit (vs. nonfit), participants with moral predispositions were more likely to consider the decision to engage in sexual intercourse outside a committed relationship as a moral issue (Study 1), and were less willing to do so (Study 2); they also expressed higher intentions of reporting income honestly for tax purposes (Study 3), imposed harsher punishment on a transgressor (Study 4), and self-sacrificed more for the common good in a social dilemma (Studies 4 and 5). The opposite was observed when participants with immoral predispositions experienced regulatory fit (vs. nonfit). In an incentivized sender–receiver game, participants with moral predispositions were less likely to lie for monetary gains when they experienced regulatory fit (vs. nonfit), whereas those with immoral predispositions were more likely to lie (Study 7). By operationalizing the regulatory fit experience as incidental to the moral decision context and assessing moral predispositions with at least a week lead or lag from the main experiment, the findings provide unambiguous evidence that regulatory fit impacts moral conduct by intensifying moral predispositions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
