THEOLOGICAL AND PROSECUTORIAL JUDGMENTS AND DEMENTIA

The objective of the study was to compare the ways in which young people, older people, and older people with dementia cognitively integrated three factors (intention, consequence, and apology) when making prosecutorial judgments (prosecution and revenge) and theological judgments (resentment and reconciliation). The study used an experimental design. The participants were 34 young people (Mage = 22.12, SD = 3.44), 36 older people (Mage = 66.03, SD = 10.21), and 18 older people with dementia (Mage = 75, SD = 10.06). For each moral judgment, the participants were confronted with 12 scenarios built from the combination of the three factors. A set of analyses of variance (ANOVAs) with repeated measures were performed on data. Whatever the judgment, older people with dementia differed from young people and older people with regard to the number of factors considered. Young and older participants used the three information cues (intent, consequence, and apologies) for the four judgment tasks (prosecution, revenge, reconciliation, and resentment) while older people with dementia gave greater weight to intention. In contrast to young and older people, older people with dementia processed prosecutorial judgments and theological judgments in the same manner. The cognitive impairment does not allow older people with dementia to differentiate moral judgments into two categories. Dementia has a negative influence on process of information integration in moral judgment. This may be useful for clinical practice – caregivers.

本研究旨在比较年轻人、老年人及老年痴呆患者在做出检察判断（prosecutorial judgments）与神学判断（theological judgments）时，对意图、后果及道歉这三个因素进行认知整合的方式差异。研究采用实验设计，参与者包括34名年轻人（平均年龄=22.12岁，标准差=3.44）、36名老年人（平均年龄=66.03岁，标准差=10.21）及18名老年痴呆患者（平均年龄=75岁，标准差=10.06）。针对每项道德判断，参与者需面对由上述三个因素组合构建的12个场景。研究对数据实施了重复测量方差分析（analyses of variance with repeated measures, ANOVAs）。结果表明，无论何种判断类型，老年痴呆患者在考虑因素的数量上均与年轻人及老年人存在显著差异：年轻人与老年人在四项判断任务（起诉、报复、和解、怨恨）中均会综合运用三类信息线索（意图、后果、道歉），而老年痴呆患者则更侧重意图因素。此外，老年痴呆患者处理检察判断与神学判断的方式趋于一致，其认知障碍导致无法区分这两类道德判断。该研究结果或对临床护理实践具有重要参考价值。