Morality is an eternal topic that has been contemplated and pursued by both philosophers and lay people alike for thousands of years. Psychologists have found that individuals' moral judgments, moral emotions, moral intentions, moral motivations, moral reasoning and moral behaviors are not internally consistent. Among these, moral behavior is most relevant to everyday life. Given that moral behaviors are influenced by various factors such as personality traits (e.g., virtue), social situations (e.g., time pressure), and social desirability (e.g., moral image), it is quite challenging to effectively and accurately measure moral behaviors both in the laboratory and in real-life social situations. Our current work synthesizes differing concepts of moral behaviors and their conceptual distinctions from diverse disciplinary perspectives. We then offer a selective review on differing paradigms such as scale method, laboratory experiment, virtual reality, field experiment, big data approaches and experience-sampling method. It is our hope that this work would inspire researchers to better capture and explore the complex and dynamic moral behaviors, and provide potential future prospects to the emerging trends of novel thoughts, theories, methods, paradigms and applications for unveiling moral behaviors and their underlying processes.

1. Abend, G. (2013). What the science of morality doesn't say about morality. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 43(2), 157-200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0048393112440597

2. Ayala, F. J. (2010). The difference of being human: Morality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(2), 9015-9022. https://doi.org/10.2307/25681533

3. Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 364-374. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.364

4. Batson, C. D., Thompson, E. R., & Chen, H. (2002). Moral hypocrisy: Addressing some alternatives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(2), 330-339. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.83.2.330

5. Bauman, C. W., McGraw, A. P., Bartels, D. M., Warren, C. (2014). Revisiting external validity: Concerns about trolley problems and other sacrificial dilemmas in moral psychology. Social & Personality Psychology Compass, 8(9), 536-554. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12131

6. Beal, D. J. (2015). ESM 2.0: State of the art and future potential of experience sampling methods in organizational research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2(1), 383-407. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111335

7. Blasi, A. (1980). Bridging moral cognition and moral action: A critical review of the literature. Psychological Bulletin, 88(1), 1-45. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.1.1

8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

9. Buchan, N. R., Grimalda, G., Wilson, R., Brewer, M., Fatas, E., & Foddy, M. (2009). Globalization and human cooperation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(11), 4138-4142. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0809522106

10. Buchanan, K. E., & Bardi, A. (2010). Acts of kindness and acts of novelty affect life satisfaction. The Journal of Social Psychology, 150(3), 235-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540903365554

11. Carlo, G. (2014). The development and correlates of prosocial moral behaviors. In M. Killen & J. G. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook of moral development (pp. 208-234). Psychology Press.

12. Carrier J. (1999). Reflections on ethical problems encountered in field research on Mexican male homosexuality: 1968 to present. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 1(3), 207-221. https://doi.org/10.1080/136910599300987

13. Churchland, P. S. (2011). Braintrust: What neuroscience tells us about morality. UK: Princeton University Press.

14. Clark, C. B., Swails, J. A., Pontinen, H. M., Bowerman, S. E., Kriz, K. A., & Hendricks, P. S. (2017). A behavioral economic assessment of individualizing versus binding moral foundations. Personality and Individual Differences, 112, 49-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.02.052

15. Cohn, A., Marechal, M. A., Tannenbaum, D., & Zund, C. L. (2019). Civic honesty around the globe. Science, 365(6448), 70-73. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau8712

16. Crockett, M. J., Clark, R., Hauser, R., & Robbins, R. W. (2010). Serotonin selectively influences moral judgment and behavior through effects on harm aversion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(40), 17433-17438. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1009396107

17. Dhiman, S. (2020). Being good and being happy: Eudaimonic well-being insights from Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. In P. L. Perrewé, P. D. Harms, & C. H. Chang (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of workplace well-being (pp. 1-30). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

18. Dostert, L. E. (1955). The georgetown-ibm experiment. In W. N. Locke, & A. D. Booth (Eds.), Machine translation of languages (pp. 124-135). John Wiley & Sons.

19. Ellemers, N. (2018). Morality and social identity. In M. V. Zomeren, & J. Dovidio (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the human essence (pp. 147-158). UK: Oxford Library of Psychology, Oxford University Press.

20. Ellemers, N., Toorn, J. V. D., Paunov, Y., & Leeuwen, T. V. (2019). The psychology of morality: A review and analysis of empirical studies published from 1940 through 2017. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 23(4), 332-366. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868318811759

21. Eriksson, K., Strimling, P., Andersson, P. A., & Lindholm, T. (2017). Costly punishment in the ultimatum game evokes moral concern, in particular when framed as payoff reduction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 69, 59-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.09.004

22. Farthing, G. W. (2005). Attitudes toward heroic and nonheroic physical risk takers as mates and as friends. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(2), 171-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.08.004

23. Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415, 137-140. https://doi.org/10.1038/415137a

24. FeldmanHall, O., Mobbs, D., Evans, D., Hiscox, L., Navardy, L., & Dalgleish, T. (2012). What we say and what we do: The relationship between real and hypothetical moral choices. Cognition, 123(3), 434-441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.02.001

25. Fiske, A. P., & Rai, T. S. (2014). Virtuous violence: Hurting and killing to create, sustain, end, and honor social relationships. Cambridge University Press.

26. Francis, K. B., Charles, H., Howard, I. S., Michaela, G., Giorgio, G., Grace, A., Sylvia, T., & Wan, X. (2016). Virtual morality: Transitioning from moral judgment to moral action? PloS One, 11(10), e0164374. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164374

27. Gabriel A. S., Podsakoff, N. P., Beal, D. J., Scott, B. A., Sonnentag, S., Trougakos, J. P., & Butts, M. M. (2019). Experience sampling methods: A discussion of critical trends and considerations for scholarly advancement. Organizational Research Methods, 22(4), 969-1006. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428118802626

28. Gino, F., & Mogilner, C. (2014). Time, money, and morality. Psychological Science, 25(2), 414-421. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613506438

29. Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029-1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141

30. Graham, J., Meindl, P., Beall, E., Johnson, K. M., & Zhang, L. (2016). Cultural differences in moral judgment and behavior, across and within societies. Current Opinion in Psychology, 8, 125-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.09.007

31. Graham, J. (2014). Morality beyond the lab. Science, 345(6202), 1242-1242. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259500

32. Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293(5537), 2105-2108. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1062872

33. Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of economic behavior & organization, 3(4), 367-388. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(82)90011-7

34. Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814-834. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.108.4.814

35. Haidt, J. (2007). The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316(5827), 998-1002. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1137651

36. Haidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2004). Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus, 133(4), 55-66.

37. Hansen, J. A., & Tummers, L. G. (2020). A systematic review of field experiments in public administration. Public Administration Review, 80(6), 921-931. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13181

38. Heiman, G. W. (1995). Research methods in psychology (pp. 311-314). Houghton Mifflin Company.

39. Hershfield, H. E., Cohen, T. R., & Thompson, L. (2012). Short horizons and tempting situations: Lack of continuity to our future selves leads to unethical decision making and behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(2), 298-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.11.002

40. Hertz, S. G., & Krettenauer, T. (2016). Does moral identity effectively predict moral behavior? A meta-analysis. Review of General Psychology, 20(2), 129-140. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000062

41. Hoffman, E., McCabe, K., Shachat, K., & Smith, V. (1994). Preferences, property rights, and anonymity in bargaining games. Games and Economic Behavior, 7(3), 346-380. https://doi.org/10.1006/game.1994.1056

42. Hofmann, W., Wisneski, D. C., Brandt, M. J., & Skitka, L. J. (2014). Morality in everyday life. Science, 345(6202), 1340-1343. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1251560

43. Hoover, J., Johnson, K., Boghrati, R., Graham, J., & Dehghani, M. (2018). Moral framing and charitable donation: Integrating exploratory social media analyses and confirmatory experimentation. Collabra: Psychology, 4(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.129

44. Hoyda, J. J., & Jarry, J. L. (2024). Moral centrality is associated with better mental health through eudaimonic well-being. Current Psychology, 43(10), 9130-9140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05080-4

45. Hu, X., Han, Y., Yu, F., & Peng, K. (2020). [The double-edged sword effect of multicultural experience: Psychological consequences and boundary conditions]. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 69(1), 1-9.

46. Hu, C. S., Peng, K., & Chen, S. X. (2021). [Cultural psychology interpretation of globalization paradox]. Applied Psychology, 70(1), 1-25.

47. Hu, X., Yu, F., & Peng, K. (2018). [How does culture affect morality? Intercultural variation, intracultural variation and multicultural perspectives]. Advances in Psychological Science, 26(11), 2081-2090. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.02081

48. Iliev, R., Dehghani, M., & Sagi, E. (2015). Automated text analysis in psychology: Methods, applications, and future developments. Language and Cognition, 7(2), 265-290. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2014.30

49. Kistler, D., Thöni, C., & Welzel, C. (2017). Survey response and observed behavior: Emancipative and secular values predict prosocial behaviors. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 48(4), 461-489. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022117696799

50. Knobe, J., Buckwalter, W., Nichols, S., Robbins, P., Sarkissian, H., & Sommers, T. (2012). Experimental philosophy. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 81-99. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100350

51. Kohlberg, L. (1994). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In D.A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research. Garland Publishing.

52. Krylova, K. O., Jolly, P. M., & Phillips, J. S. (2017). Followers' moral judgments and leaders' integrity-based transgressions: A synthesis of literatures. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 195-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.10.002

53. Lalwani, A. K., Shavitt, S., & Johnson, T. (2006). What is the relation between cultural orientation and socially desirable responding? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(1), 165-178. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.1.165

54. Lanz, L., Briker, R., & Gerpott, F. H. (2024). Employees adhere more to unethical instructions from human than AI supervisors: Complementing experimental evidence with machine learning. Journal of Business Ethics, 189(3), 625-646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05393-1

55. Liu, J. (2008). [The formation of moral character]. In Y. Morey (Ed.), Educational Psychology (pp. 228). Beijing: Educational Science Press.

56. Lu, J. G., Brockner, J., Vardi, Y., & Weitz, E. (2017). The dark side of experiencing job autonomy: Unethical behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 222-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.05.007

57. McCall, C., Blascovich, J., Young, A., & Persky, S. (2009). Proxemic behaviors as predictors of aggression towards black (but not white) males in an immersive virtual environment. Social Influence, 4(3), 138-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510802517418

58. Meindl, P., Jayawickreme, E., Furr, R. M., & Fleeson, W. (2015). A foundation beam for studying morality from a personological point of view: Are individual differences in moral behaviors and thoughts consistent? Journal of Research in Personality, 59, 81-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2015.09.005

59. Myyry, L., Helkama, K., Silfver-Kuhalampi, M., Petkova, K. G., Valentim, J. P., & Liik, K. (2021). Explorations in reported moral behaviors, values, and moral emotions in four countries. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 661172. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.661172

60. Navarrete, C. D., McDonald, M. M., Mott, M. L., & Asher, B. (2012). Virtual morality: Emotion and action in a simulated three-dimensional "trolley problem". Emotion, 12(2), 364-370. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025561

61. Oosterbeek, H., Sloof, R., & Kuilen, G. V. D. (2004). Cultural differences in ultimatum game experiments: Evidence from a meta-analysis. Experimental Economics, 7(2), 171-188. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.286428

62. Peng, K., Liu, H., Cao, B., & Zhang, K. (2011). [Virtual social psychology: Reality, exploration, and significance]. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(7), 933-943.

63. Peng, K., Yu, F., & Bai, X. (2011). [Experimental ethics: Research, contributions, and challenges]. Chinese Social Sciences, (6), 15-25.

64. Pennebaker, J. W. (2011). The secret life of pronouns: what our words say about us. Bloomsbury Press.

65. Powell, K. L., Roberts, G., & Nettle, D. (2012). Eye images increase charitable donations: Evidence from an opportunistic field experiment in a supermarket. Ethology, 118(11), 1096-1101. https://doi.org/10.1111/eth.12011

66. Pozzoli, T., Gini, G., & Thornberg, R. (2016). Bullying and defending behavior: The role of explicit and implicit moral cognition. Journal of School Psychology, 59, 67-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2016.09.005

67. Prentice, M., Jayawickreme, E., & Fleeson, W. (2020). An experience sampling study of the momentary dynamics of moral, autonomous, competent, and related need satisfactions, moral enactments, and psychological thriving. Motivation and Emotion, 44(2), 244-256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-020-09829-3

68. Qadir, A. M., & Varol, A. (2020, June). The role of machine learning in digital forensics. 2020 8th International Symposium on Digital Forensics and Security (ISDFS) (pp. 1-5). IEEE.

69. Seo, M., Na, J., & Kim, Y. (2020). Moral in whose eyes? Cross-cultural differences in moral decision making and behavior. International Journal of Psychology, 56(1), 175-182. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12681

70. Shah, F., Anwar, A., Ul Haq, I., AlSalman, H., Hussain, S., & Al-Hadhrami, S. (2022). Artificial intelligence as a service for immoral content detection and eradication. Scientific Programming, 2022(1), 6825228. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6825228

71. Slater, M., Rovira, A., Southern, R., Swapp, D., Zhang, J. J., Campbell, C., & Levine, M. (2013). Bystander responses to a violent incident in an immersive virtual environment. PLoS ONE, 8(1), e52766. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052766

72. Slater, M., Antley, A., Davison, A., Swapp, D., Guger, C., Barker, C., Pistrang, N., & Sanchez-Vives, M. V. (2006). A virtual reprise of the Stanley Milgram obedience experiments. PLoS ONE, 1(1), e39. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000039

73. Suleiman, R. (1996). Expectations and fairness in a modified ultimatum game. Journal of Economic Psychology, 17(5), 531-554. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(96)00029-3

74. Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29(1), 24-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351676

75. Teper, R., Inzlicht, M., & Page-Gould, E. (2011). Are we more moral than we think Exploring the role of affect in moral behavior and moral forecasting. Psychological Science, 22(4), 553-558. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611402513

76. Teper, R., Tullett, A. M., Page-Gould, E., & Inzlicht, M. (2015). Errors in moral forecasting: perceptions of affect shape the gap between moral behaviors and moral forecasts. Personality of Social and Psychology Bulletin, 41(7), 887-900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215583848

77. Wiltermuth, S. S. (2011). Cheating more when the spoils are split. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 157-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.10.001

78. Yu, F., & Xu, Y. (2018). [Chinese moral structure: Moral difference sequence circle]. Journal of Nanjing Normal University (Social Science Edition), (6), 65-74.

79. Yu, F., & Xu, Y. (2018). [How to make an ethical artificial intelligence body? A psychological perspective]. Journal of Global Media, 5(4), 24-42.

80. Yu, F., Peng, K., & Zheng, X. (2015). [Psychology in the context of big data: The restructuring and characteristics of the discipline system of Chinese psychology]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 60(5), 520-533. https://doi.org/10.1360/N972014-00977

81. Yu, F., Dou, K., Dong, Y., & Han, S. (2014). [Is virtue the premise of happiness? ] Psychological Science, 37(6), 1518-1523. https://doi.org/CNKI:SUN:XLKX.0.2014-06-039

82. Yu, F., Han, S., Chai, F., & Bai, X. (2011). [The predicament of moral dilemma: The debate between emotion and reason]. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(11), 1702-1712.

83. Yu, F., Xu, Y., Han, S., Liu, J., Qian, M., Peng, K., & Hu, C. (2020). [Moral rhythm: Moral motivation changes every minute based on Sina Weibo]. Science Bulletin, 65(1), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1360/TB-2019-0714

84. Zhang, J., & Wang, X. (2010). [Personality self-assessment: The moderating effect of the consistency of his evaluation and relationship quality]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 18(3), 349-352.