English

上海大学学报(社会科学版) ›› 2025, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (5): 111-128.

• • 上一篇    下一篇

旁观者清不清：网络旁观者对负面互动事件的道德判断机制

  

  1. 暨南大学 深圳旅游学院
  • 出版日期:2025-09-15 发布日期:2025-09-22
  • 作者简介:
    温碧燕，暨南大学深圳旅游学院教授、博士生导师。研究方向:旅游市场营销与服务管理。
    吴慈恩，暨南大学深圳旅游学院博士研究生。
  • 基金资助:

Are Bystanders Clear-headed or Not: The Moral Judgment Mechanism of Cyber-bystanders in Negative Interaction Events

  1. Shenzhen Tourism College, Jinan University
  • Online:2025-09-15 Published:2025-09-22

摘要：

服务业员工与顾客的负面互动事件频发，网络旁观者目睹负面互动事件后的道德判断机制及其驱动下的行为（网络评论）对事件发展具有重要影响。基于典型负面互动案例，通过Python爬取5则样本视频下的网络评论数据，并对28名参与评论的网络旁观者进行半结构化深度访谈，结合扎根理论对材料进行三级编码分析。研究发现，网络旁观者的道德判断通过三种路径实现：直觉评估的直接作用，道德推理的直接作用，以及两者的交互作用；其判断驱动下产生四类典型旁观行为（道德反思、道德援助、道德惩罚、社交互动），这些行为进一步形成破坏螺旋效应，加剧负面互动事件的恶性发展。

关键词:

Abstract:

Negative interaction events involving employees and customers in the service industry have become increasingly frequent, and the mechanisms of moral judgment among cyber-bystanders after witnessing such incidents and their subsequent behaviors—specifically online commentary—exerting a significant influence on the escalation of these events. Methodologically, this study first selected a typical negative interaction case. It then employed Python to crawl online comments from five related sample videos and conducted semi-structured interviews with 28 cyber-bystanders who had engaged in commenting. The combined qualitative data were then analyzed using a three-stage coding process guided by grounded theory. The findings reveal that the moral judgments of cyber-bystanders are formed through three distinct pathways: the direct effect of intuitive appraisal, the direct effect of moral reasoning, and an interaction between the two. These judgments, in turn, drive four typical categories of bystander behavior: moral reflection, moral assistance, moral punishment, and social interaction. Collectively, these behaviors contribute to a“destructive spiral effect”that exacerbates the development of negative interaction events.

Key words:

中图分类号: