?
Влияние социального сравнения на изменение моральных суждений: апробация экспериментального подхода к оценке
When individuals evaluate the moral culpability of others, do they adjust their judgments after learning how a peer has assessed the same situation — and does it matter whether that peer ranks higher or lower in the group’s social hierarchy? This paper presents a novel experimental procedure that integrates four elements previously not combined in a single field design: vignette-based elicitation of third-party moral judgments, sociometric identification of referents within real academic groups, and face-to-face dyadic interaction as the mechanism of referent influence in a three-wave pretest–intervention–posttest experimental design. Across six student groups (N = 35 dyads) we test two hypotheses about moral conformity and its moderation by status asymmetry. The first hypothesis is strongly confirmed: participants’ moral judgments shift systematically toward the referent’s position in proportion to the initial discrepancy between them. A significant negative effect of academic performance suggests that higher-achieving students are less susceptible to referent influence, a finding that warrants dedicated follow-up. The second hypothesis that upward social comparison produces stronger conformity vs. lateral comparison proved beyond the reach of the current design: the study was underpowered for detecting the interaction effect. The paper documents the methodological lessons of this pilot and proposes specific design improvements for subsequent research.