众所周知，人们擅长于产生能够增强和保护他们的道德自我形象的归因。Lin等人在2016年进行了3项研究，证明了在大多数的亲社会请求的背景下，对于接受还是不接受，自我服务的归因可能会适得其反：一旦面对环境改变的情况，人们先前的归因受到挑战的时候，他们会因为感受到更大的道德压力而觉得必须按照他们的归因去履行当初的亲社会承诺，即善行“回火”现象的存在。善良在中国的文化中有着不可或缺的角色,在辞典中，“善”是形容词,表达的是“好”的意思，几乎所有的中华传统美德都与善有关。但在传统的西方文化背景下，善良甚至不会被作为人格成分而存在。那么，善行“回火”现象在中国文化背景下是否依然会发生？善行“回火”现象是否会受到善良人格的影响？此外，善行“回火”现象是否会引发道德许可这一道德自我调节现象呢？ 本研究选取了392名参与者，通过三个子实验就这些问题展开了研究与讨论。其中，预研究通过176名参与者以网上问卷调查的形式为后续实验选取了两则助人材料做为回火范式的助人情境；研究一把原研究的三个子实验统一合并为一个实验，分别作为一个试验的三个步骤对153名参与者进行了研究。验证了善行“回火”现象在不同人口学变量、不同助人情景下仍可显著发生；之后使用《善良人格问卷》对参与者的善良人格倾向进行跟踪测量，验证了参与者善良人格对善行“回火”效应具有调节作用；研究二采用新的助人情境和新的63名参与者，进一步验证了善行“回火”现象可显著发生之后，验证了善行“回火”现象不会引发参与者后续善行表达的道德许可现象。 研究最终得到了如下结论：善行“回火”现象在不同文化、不同人口学变量、不同助人情景下均具有较好的外部效度；善良人格可以显著调节善行“回火”现象，善良人格得分越高，回火现象越强（前后得分差异越大），高善良人格组的回火现象高于低善良人格组；善行“回火”现象在参与者后续善行表达时，不会引发其道德许可现象的发生。

As we all know, people are good at producing attributions that enhance and protect their moral self-image. Lin et al. conducted three studies in 2016, demonstrating that in the context of most prosocial requests, the acceptance of self-service may be counterproductive to acceptance or not: Once faced with environmental changes, people previously When the attributions are challenged, they feel that they must follow their attributions to fulfill their original pro-social commitments because they feel more moral pressure, that is, the existence of a good “temper” phenomenon. Goodness has an indispensable role in Chinese culture. In the dictionary, “good” is an adjective and expresses “good”. Almost all traditional Chinese virtues are related to good. However, in the traditional Western cultural context, goodness does not even exist as a personality component. So, is the phenomenon of good “backfire” still happening in the context of Chinese culture? Does the good practice of “backfire” be affected by good personality? In addition, is the good practice of “backfire” a moral self-adjustment that will trigger moral approval? This study selected 392 participants and conducted research and discussion on these issues through three sub-experiments. Among the pre-studies, 176 participants used online questionnaires to select two helper materials as a backfire paradigm for the follow-up experiment; three sub-experiments of the original study were consolidated into one experiment, respectively. The three steps of a trial conducted a study of 153 participants. It has been verified that the phenomenon of good behavior “backfire” can still occur significantly under different demographic variables and different helper scenarios; afterwards, the “good personality questionnaire” is used to track and measure the good personality tendency of the participants, verifying that the good personality of the participants is good The “quenching” effect has a moderating effect; in Study Two, a new helper scenario and a new 63 participants were used to further verify that the good-going “backfire” phenomenon can significantly occur, and that the good-going “backfire” phenomenon does not trigger participants. The follow-up to the moral permission phenomenon expressed. The research finally reached the following conclusion: The " backfire" phenomenon of good behavior has a good external validity under different cultures, different demographic variables, and different scenarios of helping others; good personality can significantly regulate the phenomenon of good "backfire" and good personality score. The higher the score, the stronger the backfire phenomenon (the greater the difference between the scores before and after), the higher the goodness of personality group's "backfire" phenomenon is higher than that of the low-kind personality group; the good behavior of "backfire" will not cause the phenomenon of licensing, when the participants follow the good deeds.