Publications
態度極化常造成群際間的不和與衝突，乃至社會動盪，因此探討態度極化的緩解兼具理論與應用價值。本研究探討觀點取替是否可改變個體資訊處理的方式，進而避免態度趨向極端。本研究以社會議題的書寫進行實驗，首先測量參與者書寫前對兩個社會議題（非核家園與廢除死刑）的同意程度，然後請參與者透過兩階段書寫來闡述對於兩個議題的論點。在第一個書寫階段，對其中一個議題進行書寫時，參與者均依照自身觀點書寫；在第二個書寫階段，對另外一個議題書寫時，一半的參與者依照自身觀點，另一半則透過觀點取替來依照對立方觀點進行書寫。實驗最後再次測量參與者對兩個議題的同意程度。結果發現，針對第二個書寫議題，相對於書寫自身觀點，當參與者想像身處於自己立場的對立方，並書寫該方的論點後，便不會產生態度極化。進一步對書寫文本進行字詞分析發現，觀點取替對態度極化的影響是由去脈絡化的推理模式所中介，此種推理模式的內涵是個體在遠離自我既有信念的情況下來處理對立方論點。本研究亦發現，對態度極化的緩解還能擴及未採取觀點取替的第一個議題，產生對議題態度的遷移效果。研究者亦針對這些發現指出未來的研究方向，並討論在教育和其他領域上可能的應用。
Meat consumption contributes to climate change and has become a moralized issue. People may face moral criticism for meat consumption. Building on the central role of morality in person evaluation, this research tested the hypotheses that moral (vs. competence) and public (vs. private) criticism received online would elicit greater defensiveness among meat-eaters. Study 1 ( = 307) supported the hypothesis that moral criticism heightened defensive responses (e.g. sensitivity, derogation, and avoidance). Study 2 ( = 316) showed, unexpectedly, that private criticism led to greater defensiveness, potentially due to its "personal" nature. Further analysis revealed that the effects of moral framing and private criticism were mediated by perceived moral devaluation. Defensive responses were also generally stronger among individuals higher in narcissistic rivalry. In addition, perceived moral devaluation predicted lower intention to reduce meat consumption. Public messaging aimed at reducing meat consumption should avoid moral framing and personal-sounding negative feedback to minimize defensive responses.