时间定价对亲社会行为的影响

时间定价就是将金钱价格赋予时间之上,用金钱来衡量时间的价值。已有研究表明,时间定价激活时间经济价值最大化的心理定势,使个体更看重时间的经济回报,花更少的时间帮助他人。但是,时间定价对亲社会行为的影响可能并不仅仅局限于时间利他。本研究通过三个实验,除了考察时间定价对时间利他的影响外,还进一步探讨时间定价对金钱利他的影响。结果显示,时间定价不仅影响个体的时间利他行为,也削弱了金钱利他行为。这表明,时间定价所激活的经济效用心理定势不仅仅局限于时间这一种资源的效用。     

The illusion of courage in social predictions: Underestimating the impact of fear of embarrassment on other people

The results of two experiments support the thesis that emotional perspective taking entails two judgments: a prediction of one’s own preferences and decisions in a different emotional situation, and an adjustment of this prediction to accommodate perceived differences between self and others. Participants overestimated others’ willingness to engage in embarrassing public performances—miming (Experiment 1) and dancing (Experiment 2)—in exchange for money. Consistent with a dual judgment model, this overestimation was greater among participants facing a hypothetical rather than a real decision to perform. Further, participants’ predictions of others’ willingness to perform were more closely correlated with self-predictions than with participants’ estimates of others’ thoughts about the costs and benefits of performing.     

“电子钱包”让人花钱更多？——手机支付的心理账户效应

为探究手机支付使用者消费增加的现象及其心理账户效应,使用计算机程序对114名被试进行了三项模拟购物实验。实验发现：（1）手机支付组被试的商品消费次数和金额都显著高于现金支付组被试,且这种差异体现在功能型商品的消费上。（2）手机支付时被试不会倾向于对大金额的消费进行控制,对大钱和小钱的花费不存在显著差异。（3）手机支付时收到红包的被试消费次数和金额显著高于账户常规收入的被试,且更多用于享乐型消费。总的来看,手机支付减弱了对大额金钱和意外收入的消费控制,非现金支付让消费者花钱更多。     

Listeners invest in an assumed other's perspective despite cognitive cost

We explored perspective-taking behavior in a visuospatial mental rotation task that requires listeners to adopt an egocentric or “other-centric” frame of reference. In the current task, objects could be interpreted relative to the point-of-view of the listener (egocentric) or of a simulated partner (other-centric). Across three studies, we evaluated participants’ willingness to consider and act on partner-specific information, showing that a partner’s perceived ability to contribute to collaborative mutual understanding modulated participants’ perspective-taking behavior, either by increasing other-centric (Study 2) or egocentric (Study 3) responding. Moreover, we show that a large proportion of participants resolved referential ambiguity in terms of their partner’s perspective, even when it was more cognitively difficult to do so (as tracked by online movement measures), and when the presence of a social partner had to be assumed (Studies 1 and 2). In addition, participants continued to consider their partner’s perspective during trials where visual perspectives were shared. Our results show that participants will thoroughly invest in either an other-centric or egocentric mode of responding, and that perspective-taking strategies are not always dictated by minimizing processing demands, but by more potent (albeit subtle) factors in the social context.     

Interpersonal consequences of forgiveness: Does forgiveness deter or encourage repeat offenses?

Benefits of forgiveness have been well documented, but past research has not directly addressed the crucial question of whether forgiveness deters or invites repeat transgressions. Our research indicates that expressing forgiveness typically discourages future offenses. In Study 1, participants playing a form of the prisoner’s dilemma game were more likely to repeat their transgressions against unforgiving victims than forgiving victims, especially when victims had no chance to retaliate. In response to a hypothetical scenario presented in Study 2, participants reported that they would be less likely to risk offending someone for a second time if that person had forgiven their first offense. In Study 3, participants’ autobiographical recollections of their prior transgressions revealed that receiving forgiveness predicted higher repentance motivation.     

When Sharing Is Not Caring: Does (un)Certainty About Bill Payment Method Lead Diners to Consume More and Spend More Money?

Previous work has demonstrated that unacquainted participants in an experimental, restaurant‐like setting consume more when they know in advance that the bill will be split evenly rather than paid according to individual consumption. Real life, however, often differs from these experimental settings in two important ways. First, unlike random groups of participants, diners who eat together are frequently friends or colleagues. Second, payment method (even vs. individual payment) is usually unknown (i.e. uncertain) at the time people place their orders, and is determined when the check arrives. The current research tests the ecological validity of the association between consumption amount and payment method. Study 1 was conducted in a natural setting with organic groups of diners. Some were asked to state their desired payment method before ordering (Certain condition); others did so only after asking for the check (Uncertain condition). In both conditions, even payment (as opposed to individual payment) was associated with greater consumption amount. However, overall, consumption amount was lower among diners in the Uncertain condition than among those in the Certain condition. Study 2 presents a controlled follow‐up experiment showing that eliminating diners' prior expectations regarding the payment method—by informing them that the payment method will be randomly determined after the consumption decision—eliminates the relationship between payment method and consumption amount. This study further indicates that when diners are uncertain what the payment method will be, even bill‐splitting has negative implications for their subsequent social interactions, expressed in retribution tendencies. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Time,money, and happiness: How does putting a price on time affect our ability to smell the roses?

In this paper, we investigate how the impatience that results from placing a price on time impairs individuals' ability to derive happiness from pleasurable experiences. Experiment 1 demonstrated that thinking about one's income as an hourly wage reduced the happiness that participants derived from leisure time on the internet. Experiment 2 revealed that a similar manipulation decreased participants' state of happiness after listening to a pleasant song and that this effect was fully mediated by the degree of impatience experienced during the music. Finally, Experiment 3 showed that the deleterious effect on happiness caused by impatience was attenuated by offering participants monetary compensation in exchange for time spent listening to music, suggesting that a sensation of unprofitably wasted time underlay the induced impatience. Together these experiments establish that thinking about time in terms of money can influence how people experience pleasurable events by instigating greater impatience during unpaid time.     

The hidden cost of value-seeking: People do not accurately forecast the economic benefits of experiential purchases

In spite of the experiential advantage, people consume material items in the pursuit of happiness. We conducted three studies to determine if people commit forecasting errors when deciding between purchasing life experiences and material items. Study 1a showed that people expect life experiences to result in more well-being, whereas material items are forecasted to be a better use of money. However, Study 1b demonstrated that people enjoy greater well-being from life experiences and consider them to be a better use of money. Study 2, a four-week longitudinal study, corroborated this economic misforecast. Study 3 demonstrated that seeking to make good use of one’s money, compared to prioritizing happiness, is more important during material consumption, and when people attempt to maximize economic value, instead of their happiness, they are more likely to consume material items. We suggest that prioritizing value may encourage people to prefer material items instead of life experiences.     

道德自我调节对亲社会行为和违规行为的影响

本文通过两个研究探讨道德自我调节对亲社会行为和违规行为的影响。研究一中,被试随机分为三组,分别抄写“正性特质词语”“负性特质词语”或“中性词语”,并回忆自己所经历的与关键词有关的事情。启动完成后,考察其捐助行为。结果发现,正性特质启动组被试愿意捐助的数目显著高于负性特质和中性词语启动组。研究二用同样的方法改变被试的道德自我知觉,然后对被试的作弊行为进行了考察。结果发现,正性特质启动组的作弊严重程度显著低于中性词语启动组,负性特质启动组的作弊发生率和作弊严重程度显著低于中性词语启动组。本研究表明,道德自我调节过程不一定遵循负反馈机制：虽然“道德净化效应”在本研究中得到了部分验证,但是我们的实验结果不符合“道德许可效应”的预期。     

Low‐status aversion: the effect of self‐threat on willingness to buy and sell

Consumption decisions are inherently rooted in both what to consume and what to forgo. Although prior research has focused on consumption, we instead examine what compels consumers to steer clear of particular goods. In two studies, we demonstrated that individuals experiencing self‐threat avoid low‐status goods to prevent further damage to their self‐worth. Individuals facing self‐threat showed a decreased willingness to buy (Study 1), and a correspondingly greater willingness to sell (Study 2) low‐status goods, as compared with nonthreatened individuals. Notably, these effects emerged even when such behaviors were associated with economic costs (Study 2). Together, these results highlight how the motive to preserve the self can affect market exchanges, thereby painting a more complete portrait of the relationship between consumption, status, and the self.     

Committing Altruism under the Cloak of Self-Interest: The Exchange Fiction

Two field studies tested the hypothesis that people's willingness to help a charitable organization is greater when the act is presented as an economic transaction than when it is presented as an act of charity. In Study 1 participants donated more money to a charity when offered a product in exchange for their donation, even though the product itself held little appeal for them. Participants' donation rates were also more responsive to the level of need of the victim group when they were offered a product in exchange for their donation, consistent with the idea that the exchange provided psychological cover for their act of compassion. In Study 2 participants' willingness to purchase a product from a charitable organization increased the more of a bargain the price was purported to be, but only when the victims' need was high. The source of people's desire to not reveal or even to recognize the full extent of their prosocial motivation is discussed, as are the implications of the exchange fiction for charity appeals.     

How subjective grouping of options influences choice and allocation: diversification bias and the phenomenon of partition dependence

The authors argue that people's tendency to diversify their allocations of money and consumption choices over alternatives gives rise to decisions that vary systematically with the subjective grouping of available options. These subjective groupings are influenced by subtle variations in the presentation of options or elicitation of preferences. Studies 1-4 demonstrate such "partition dependence" in allocations of money to beneficiaries, consumption experiences to future time periods, and choices to a menu of consumption options. Study 5 documents weaker partition dependence among individuals with greater relevant experience discriminating among options, and Study 6 shows that the effect is attenuated among participants with stronger or more accessible intrinsic preferences.     

Piece of cake? Allocating rewards to third parties when fairness is costly

Reactions to third-party inequality were investigated in three experiments. In Experiment 1, 52 undergraduates allocated money between themselves and two others. Preferences for equal and unequal distributions were also rated. The results show that people are averse to inequalities between themselves and others, and to inequalities between others. Post-experimental ratings indicate that egocentric equality, third-party equality, and max–min preferences are important motives. The findings were replicated in Experiment 2, where 74 undergraduates allocated compensation for a previously conducted task, and in Experiment 3, where 112 participants rated preferences. In these experiments random determination of rewards to third parties altered participants’ behavior and preferences. The results indicated that random determination decreases the importance of all fairness motives while increasing the importance of monetary payoff. While people still care about economic equality under these conditions, contextual factors, such as perceived responsibility for unfair outcomes, seem to alter the impact of fairness.     

Assessing the adequacy of postexperimental inquiries in deception research and the factors that promote participant honesty

The primary aim of this research was to assess the adequacy of postexperimental inquiries (PEI) used in deception research, as well as to examine whether mood state, reward, or administering the PEI as a face-to-face interview or computer survey impacts participants’ willingness to divulge suspicion or knowledge about a study. We also sought to determine why participants are not always forthcoming on the PEI. Study 1 examined how frequently PEIs are included in research and found that most researchers employing deception do use a PEI. Studies 2 and 3 showed that participants are often unwilling to divulge suspicion or awareness of deception or to admit to having prior knowledge about a study, though offering a reward and completing the PEI on a computer modestly improved awareness and admission rates. Study 4 indicated several reasons why participants may not reveal suspicion or knowledge about a study on the PEI.     

Effects of Gender on Costly Punishment

Women are often believed to be more cooperative and less egoistic than men. In the present study, we examined whether people punish women for failing to live up to these benevolent gender stereotypes. Participants played a prisoner's dilemma game with female and male partners who either cooperated or defected. Participants were offered a costly punishment option. They could spend money to decrease the payment of their partners. In Experiment 1, participants spent more money to punish the defection of female in comparison to male partners, but this effect of partner gender on punishment was indirect rather than direct: Participants were more likely to cooperate with female partners than with male partners, which gave them more opportunity for moralistic punishment. In Experiments 2 and 3, we examined the effects of the participants' own gender on cooperation and punishment of female and male partners. Female participants cooperated more with female partners than with male partners while male participants treated female and male partners equally. We conclude that the effect of facial gender on punishment are indirect rather than direct. The results also showed that women, in contrast to men, tended to make decisions that can be considered more social and less rational from an economic point of view, consistent with social‐role theory and evolutionary accounts. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Tell me more: The effects of expressed interest on receptiveness during dialog

Two studies investigated the effect of expressed interest on individuals’ openness to opposing viewpoints and perceptions of debate counterparts. Participants in Study 1 engaged in an online conversation with a purported debate counterpart who did or did not express interest in the participants’ viewpoint by asking an elaboration question—that is, a question geared at soliciting additional information. Compared to control participants, participants who received a question rated their debate counterpart more favorably, were more willing to engage in future interaction with their counterpart, and acted in a more receptive manner. Study 2 tested the effects of instructions to prepare elaboration questions on listeners’ responses to a speaker offering counter-attitudinal arguments. Preparing questions caused participants to be more open to the idea of having a conversation with the speaker, to make more positive attributions about typical proponents of the speaker’s viewpoint, and to judge the conclusions of the speech as more valid. Theoretical and practical implications of this research are discussed.     

Incidental anger and the desire to evaluate

Our results indicate that people experiencing incidental anger are more likely than people in neutral and other emotional states to prefer to perform evaluative tasks, even though their anger may bias the evaluations they make. Induced anger increased participants’ desire to evaluate others’ ideas (Experiment 1) and made the evaluations of those ideas more negative in valence (Experiment 2). Anger increased the appeal of evaluating ideas when evaluations were expected to be largely negative but not when evaluations were expected to be positive (Experiments 3 and 4). Mediation analyses revealed that this willingness to evaluate when angry stems from a belief that evaluating others can leave angry people in a positive mood. Because people are often free to decide when to perform the tasks required of them, this tendency may have implications for how and when ideas are evaluated.     

Monopoly money: the effect of payment coupling and form on spending behavior

This article examines consumer spending as a function of payment mode both when the modes differ in terms of payment coupling (association between purchase decision and actual parting of money) and physical form as well as when the modes differ only in terms of form. Study 1 demonstrates that consumers are willing to spend more when a credit card logo is present versus absent. Study 2 shows that the credit card effect can be attenuated when people estimate their expenses using a decomposition strategy (vs. a holistic one). Noting that credit card and cash payments differ in terms of payment coupling and form, Studies 3 and 4 examine consumer spending when the payment mode differs only in physical form. Study 3 demonstrates that consumers spend more when they are spending scrip (a form of stored value certificate) versus cash of the same face value. Study 4 shows that the difference in spending across payment modes (cash and gift certificates) is attenuated by altering the salience of parting with money through contextual manipulations of the differences between cash and gift certificates.     

Influence of motivated reasoning on saving and spending decisions

The decision to save enhances well-being in the long-term but it conflicts with the desire to spend money to gain immediate gratification. In this research, we examine the influence of having single versus multiple accounts on individuals’ savings and spending decisions. We find that individuals save more with a single account than with multiple liquid accounts. Utilizing work on motivated reasoning and fuzzy-trace theory, we suggest that multiple accounts engender fuzzy gist representations, making it easier for people to generate justifications to support their desired spending decisions. However, a single account reduces the latitude for distortion and hinders generation of justifications to support desirable spending decisions. Across four studies that provide participants with the opportunity to earn, spend, and save money, we demonstrate the proposed effect and test the underlying process.     

Time is tight: how higher economic value of time increases feelings of time pressure

The common heuristic association between scarcity and value implies that more valuable things appear scarcer (King, Hicks, & Abdelkhalik, 2009), an effect we show applies to time as well. In a series of studies, we found that both income and wealth, which affect the economic value of time, influence perceived time pressure. Study 1 found that changes in income were associated with changes in perceived time pressure. Studies 2-4 showed that experimentally manipulating time's perceived economic value caused greater feelings of time pressure and less patient behavior. Finally, Study 5 demonstrated that the relationship between income and time pressure was strengthened when participants were randomly assigned to think about the precise economic value of their time.