社会距离和性别对公平关注的影响

本研究使用单次匿名最后通牒博弈任务，采用2（性别: 男性, 女性）×3（社会距离: 自我决策, 替朋友决策, 替他人决策）×5（提议类型: 1/9, 2/8, 3/7, 4/6, 5/5）的混合实验设计，通过操作反应者的不同社会距离，考察资产分配情境下自我-他人决策的性别差异。研究结果发现：（1）相比于自我决策和替朋友决策，女性被试替他人决策时更愿意接受提议1/9，2/8和3/7，而提议4/6和5/5的接受率不受社会距离的影响；男性被试中社会距离和提议类型的交互作用不显著；（2）不平等提议的反应时随社会距离增加而逐渐降低，而平等提议的反应时不受社会距离的调节；（3）替他人决策时女性的接受阈限显著低于男性，而自我决策及替朋友决策时接受阈限不存在性别差异。     

绩效、能力、职位对组织分配公平观的影响

旨在探索基于组织分配公平的认知评价和决策行为的影响因素,为此提出了不公平阈限的概念,即在追求公平和谋求自我利益的动机权衡中,个体为了追求公平而愿意放弃的最高限度的个人利益。采用最后通牒博弈和独裁者博弈的二阶段实验范式,样本量为60。结果发现,工作绩效、工作能力均对个体的不公平阈限有显著的影响;对于公平判断和基于公平的回应行为,工作绩效起着首要作用,工作能力的影响次之,再次是对方的提议数额的影响。第一阶段对方提议的分配方案对被试越有利,则第二阶段被试的回应行为越有利于对方。排除能力差别的作用之后,职位差别并未引起不公平阈限的显著差异。根据研究结果,总结出分配公平的三项原则：绩效原则、能力原则和互惠原则     

社会距离与分配差距对儿童有利不公平厌恶的影响

选取60名8-10岁儿童,采用迫选式独裁者游戏,考察个体与博弈对象的社会距离以及分配差距对儿童有利不公平厌恶的影响。结果发现：（1）在有利不公平条件下,与博弈对象社会距离越近,儿童对不公平分配提议的拒绝率越高;（2）分配差距越大,儿童对不公平分配提议的拒绝率越高;（3）社会距离和分配差距交互作用显著,在中等分配差距条件下,儿童对不公平分配提议拒绝率的社会距离效应最为明显。结果表明,社会距离和分配差距对儿童有利不公平厌恶有显著影响,在中度分配差距下社会距离具有更加明显的调节作用。     

社会距离与分配差距对儿童有利不公平厌恶的影响

选取60名8-10岁儿童,采用迫选式独裁者游戏,考察个体与博弈对象的社会距离以及分配差距对儿童有利不公平厌恶的影响。结果发现：（1）在有利不公平条件下,与博弈对象社会距离越近,儿童对不公平分配提议的拒绝率越高;（2）分配差距越大,儿童对不公平分配提议的拒绝率越高;（3）社会距离和分配差距交互作用显著,在中等分配差距条件下,儿童对不公平分配提议拒绝率的社会距离效应最为明显。结果表明,社会距离和分配差距对儿童有利不公平厌恶有显著影响,在中度分配差距下社会距离具有更加明显的调节作用。     

共情关怀对公平决策的影响——来自ERP的证据

本研究运用事件相关电位技术(event-related potential, ERP)和最后通牒博弈范式(ultimatum game, UG)考察了共情关怀对公平决策的影响。实验采用2 (状态共情关怀: 有共情关怀vs.无共情关怀) × 3 (分配公平性: 公平vs.劣势不公平vs.优势不公平)被试内设计, 共37名被试参与实验, 被试作为响应者选择是否接受提议者的分配提议。行为结果显示劣势不公平条件下, 有共情情境的接受率高于无共情情境; 优势不公平条件下呈现相反的结果。ERP结果显示: 对于他人提出的优势不公平提议, 无共情情境较有共情情境下诱发了更负的前部N1 (anterior N1, AN1), 有共情情境比无共情情境下诱发了更大的P2波幅; 有共情情境下, 他人提出的劣势不公平提议较优势不公平和公平提议诱发了更负的内侧额叶负波(medial frontal negativity, MFN); P3在公平条件下的波幅较劣势不公平条件下更大, 并未受到共情关怀的调节。这些结果表明共情关怀不仅调节了公平决策行为, 还调节了公平加工的早期注意和动机及之后的认知和情绪加工, 但由P3表征的高级认知过程仅受到公平性的调节而不受共情水平的影响。     

公平加工的情境依赖性:来自行为的证据

采用最后通牒博弈范式,考察利益水平及社会距离对个体公平加工的影响,探讨公平加工的情境依赖性。实验结果表明:(1)对分配提议的加工受到利益水平的调节,不利不公平条件下被试更加注重公平。(2)提议的不同水平影响被试的拒绝行为,提议越不公平,拒绝率越高。(3)虽然社会距离的主效应不显著,但在实际情境中,较近的社会距离下人们对公平的要求更严格,证实公平加工具有情境依赖性。     

公平加工的情境依赖性：来自ERP的证据

公平是人类社会生活的重要概念。大量研究采用最后通牒博弈, 发现人们具有不公平厌恶倾向, 即宁愿牺牲个人的经济利益, 也要拒绝不公平的分配提议。已有研究表明, 损失情境会增强不公平厌恶, 但其神经机制尚不清楚。本实验采用ERP技术, 运用最后通牒博弈范式, 考察两个情境因素：域(损失或获益)和博弈对象(人或计算机)对公平加工的影响。发现损失域下对不公平分配的拒绝率更高, 而博弈对象对决策行为无影响; 获益域下, 对家为人比对家为计算机诱发了更负的N1; 人机博弈时, 获益域比损失域诱发了更大的P2和LPP, 损失域比获益域、不公平提议比公平提议诱发了更大的N350, 而公平提议比不公平提议诱发了更大的LPP; 人际博弈时, 这些差异均不显著。这些结果表明, 对分配提议的大脑加工受博弈对象的调节, 人际博弈时, 对损益域、公平与不公平提议的加工类似, 而人机博弈时, 损失域和不公平提议涉及更多的抑制加工和冲突解决, 获益域和公平提议则更富动机性意义, 证实公平加工具有情境依赖性。     

公平加工的情境依赖性：来自ERP的证据

公平是人类社会生活的重要概念。大量研究采用最后通牒博弈, 发现人们具有不公平厌恶倾向, 即宁愿牺牲个人的经济利益, 也要拒绝不公平的分配提议。已有研究表明, 损失情境会增强不公平厌恶, 但其神经机制尚不清楚。本实验采用ERP技术, 运用最后通牒博弈范式, 考察两个情境因素：域(损失或获益)和博弈对象(人或计算机)对公平加工的影响。发现损失域下对不公平分配的拒绝率更高, 而博弈对象对决策行为无影响; 获益域下, 对家为人比对家为计算机诱发了更负的N1; 人机博弈时, 获益域比损失域诱发了更大的P2和LPP, 损失域比获益域、不公平提议比公平提议诱发了更大的N350, 而公平提议比不公平提议诱发了更大的LPP; 人际博弈时, 这些差异均不显著。这些结果表明, 对分配提议的大脑加工受博弈对象的调节, 人际博弈时, 对损益域、公平与不公平提议的加工类似, 而人机博弈时, 损失域和不公平提议涉及更多的抑制加工和冲突解决, 获益域和公平提议则更富动机性意义, 证实公平加工具有情境依赖性。     

大学生在社会困境中的公平决策:社会价值取向的影响

通过两项研究考查大学生在社会困境中的行为决策及公平感体验,检验社会价值取向的影响作用,有效被试分别为85名和84名。结果表明:(1)亲社会者比亲自我者更倾向做公平决策;信息对称比不对称条件更促进被试做公平决策;女生比男生更倾向做公平决策。(2)性别在社会价值取向与信息对称性对公平决策的影响中起调节作用,社会价值取向显著影响男生的公平决策,信息对称性显著影响女生的公平决策。(3)社会价值取向显著影响个体对不公平的容忍度,亲社会者更不容忍不公平行为。(4)对于利己的不公平行为,被试都倾向接受,亲社会者并不比亲自我者体验到更强的内疚情绪;对于不利己的不公平行为,被试都倾向拒绝,且产生较强的不公平感及气愤情绪。     

社会价值取向对自我-他人风险决策的影响及其机制

以往关于为自己和代他人决策的冒险行为研究结果不一致, 这可能是因为以往的研究没有考虑决策情境和决策者人际特质等因素对于决策行为的影响。社会价值取向(social value orientation, SVO)是一种典型的人际特质, 是个体在对自我和他人资源分配时所表现出的社会偏好, 通常分为亲社会者和亲自我者。为探究SVO对自我-他人风险决策的影响及其机制, 采用为自己和陌生人分别完成多轮混合赌博游戏的任务。结果发现亲自我比亲社会者代他人决策更冒险。用模型量化的损失厌恶和对潜在损失的敏感度部分中介了自我-他人风险决策差异, 但只有对他人潜在损失的敏感度部分中介自我-他人决策的SVO效应。说明SVO会影响自我-他人风险决策, 且该效应可以通过对他人利益的关心程度起作用, 所以在自我-他人风险决策的研究中应将SVO这一决策者的人际特质因素考虑在内。     

Social Value Orientation Moderates the Effects of Intuition versus Reflection on Responses to Unfair Ultimatum Offers

We investigated whether social value orientation (SVO) moderates the effects of intuitive versus reflective information processing on responses to unfair offers. We measured SVO one week prior to an ultimatum game experiment in which participants had to accept or reject a series of 10 ultimatum offers including very low (unfair) ones. Before making these decisions, participants mentally contrasted their individual goals with the obstacle of pondering at length or acting in a hasty way; then they made the plan to adopt an intuitive or a reflective mode of processing (intuitive and reflective condition, respectively), or made no such plans (control condition). Participants with rather high (prosocial) SVO scores were more likely to accept unfair offers in the reflective than the intuitive condition. This effect also evinced for a subset of selfish individuals; however, the majority with rather low (selfish) scores made similar decisions in both conditions. This pattern of results suggests that SVO moderates the effects of intuitive versus reflective modes of processing on responses to low ultimatum offers. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

群体共同经历影响不公平感知

以往研究考察了不公平经历如何影响个体的认知、情绪及行为。然而, 这些研究着重于考察个体“独自经历”不公平的现象, 而尚未有研究考察, 当个体与他人以群体身份共同经历不公平时, 不公平经历对个体的影响。3项实验采用改编的三人最后通牒博弈任务考察“群体共同经历”不公平如何影响个体的不公平感知。研究结果表明, 无论是通过“共同命运” (实验1)、轮流为群体做决策(实验2), 还是招募成对朋友(实验3)来操纵或凸显群体身份, 群体共同经历不公平, 相比独自经历不公平, 均显著降低(而非提升)了被试的不公平感知。研究结果对于社会及组织管理具有借鉴意义。     

诚实-谦逊性和人际亲密性对公平规范执行的影响

采用2（诚实-谦逊性：高分组、低分组）×3（人际亲密性：家人、朋友、路人）×2（提议不公性：高不公提议、低不公提议）的混合实验设计，考察人际冲突情境下诚实-谦逊性与公平规范执行中人情效应的关系。研究结果发现，随着人际亲密性的增强，人们对互动同伴的互惠预期越高，更倾向于接受不公提议；高、低诚实-谦逊者付诸公平规范执行时均会考量双方彼此的人际亲密性，但高诚实-谦逊者存在更强的人情效应。结果表明，高诚实-谦逊者更在意维持有价值的人际关系，愿意宽容重要他人的违规行为。     

Fairness‐related behaviour modulation by friendship is moderated by American primes in Chinese participants

Empirical studies from the fields of psychology and behavioural economics indicate that people do not like being treated unfairly and may punish those who violate the norm, even at a cost to themselves. Recent research has emphasized the relationship effect on fairness‐related behaviour but has shown conflicting results and has not focused much on the characteristics of culture. This study used the cultural priming paradigm and the Ultimatum Game (UG) to explore whether cultural primes could moderate the relationship effect on fairness‐related decision making. We primed Chinese participants with either Chinese cultural symbols or American cultural symbols and asked them to play as responders with friends or strangers in the two‐party UG (experiment 1) or in the three‐party UG (experiment 2). Results from the two experiments confirm that Chinese participants accepted unfair offers more often when the offers were made by friends than when the offers were made by strangers. However, the relationship effect was diminished after American cultural priming. These results suggest that American primes can moderate the relationship effect on fairness‐related behaviour in Chinese people. This finding may shed new light on the likelihood of exiting from the heavy reliance on social relationships in Chinese society.     

Gut feelings and the reaction to perceived inequity: The interplay between bodily responses, regulation, and perception shapes the rejection of unfair offers on the ultimatum game

It has been robustly demonstrated using the ultimatum game (UG) that individuals frequently reject unfair financial offers even if this results in a personal cost. One influential hypothesis for these rejections is that they reflect an emotional reaction to unfairness that overrides purely economic decision processes. In the present study, we examined whether the interplay between bodily responses, bodily regulation, and bodily perception ("interoception") contributes to emotionally driven rejection behavior on the UG. Offering support for bodily feedback theories, interoceptive accuracy moderated the relationship between changes in electrodermal activity to proposals and the behavioral rejection of such offers. Larger electrodermal responses to rejected relative to accepted offers predicted greater rejection in those with accurate interoception but were unrelated to rejection in those with poor interoception. Although cardiovascular responses during the offer period were unrelated to rejection rates, greater resting heart rate variability (linked to trait emotion regulation capacity) predicted reduced rejection rates of offers. These findings help clarify individual differences in reactions to perceived unfairness, support previous emotion regulation deficit accounts of rejection behavior, and suggest that the perception and regulation of bodily based emotional biasing signals ("gut feelings") partly shape financial decision making on the UG.     

Social value orientations and negotiator outcomes

Social value orientations (SVOs) are known to influence individual behaviour in outcome interdependent settings. By extending these findings to negotiation, this research investigates the relationship between own and partners' SVOs, negotiator strategies and outcomes. Results showed that cooperators, competitors and individualists could be distinguished in terms of initial demands and concessions. Competitors made higher initial demands and larger concessions than individualists or cooperators, suggesting that their ability to maximize outcome differences rests on whether structural features are congruent with this goal. The principal finding of this research was the demonstration that own and partners' SVO interact to determine outcomes. Results showed that the three SVO groups differed in terms of context sensitivity: competitor outcomes were invariant across partners; individualists achieved poor outcomes in negotiations with cooperators and, reciprocally, cooperators attained high outcomes in negotiations with individualists. Additionally, individualist outcomes worsened in their last negotiation, while those of cooperators differed as a function of role and partner's SVO. These results suggest that although the information used by individualists and cooperators differs, for both groups the cognitive representation of negotiations is a further factor influencing their outcomes.     

Coupling and decoupling of unfairness and anger in ultimatum bargaining

Although previous research has demonstrated the importance of emotions in ultimatum bargaining, this research provides a more direct, convergent test of the role of anger in explaining rejections of unfair offers in ultimatum bargaining. First, using appraisal theory of emotions, this research examines the extent to which the cognitive appraisal of unfairness leads to the emotion of anger, which in turn, drives punitive behavior (i.e., rejection of offers). Second, this research explores the possibility of decoupling the emotion of anger from its antecedent appraisal of unfairness in order to attenuate responders' inclination to reject unfair offers. Third, following the current research tradition that goes beyond a valence‐based approach, we differentiate between the negative emotions of anger and sadness and examine whether it is the specific emotion of anger that is relevant to the cognitive appraisal of unfairness or the general negative valence of the emotion. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

心理距离与后果严重性对人身安全决策的影响

已有研究发现决策者在为自己与不同他人决策时,其风险偏好存在差异。但是当对后果严重性不同的事件进行决策时,上述结果也并不总是如此。为了探究在人身安全情境中决策者面对后果严重程度不同的任务时,为自己和为他人决策时风险偏好的差异,实验一采用人际亲密度和决策所带来消极结果的严重程度分别操纵心理距离与后果严重性,结果发现决策者在后果严重任务中的决策比后果不严重任务更保守,为自己和为陌生人决策均比为最好朋友决策更冒险。这可能是由于决策者知觉到的决策责任不同所致。因此在实验一的基础上实验二引入决策责任这一变量,考察其在心理距离对风险决策影响中的作用,研究结果证明了我们的假设。