民众收入不公平感的机制与对策——基于参照依赖和损失规避双视角

近年来,贫富差距的不断加大已引起民众较为强烈的收入不公平感,而导致收入不公平感产生的一个主要原因是人们对自己收入所得不如他人的相对比较。本项目基于预期理论价值函数的参照依赖和损失规避双视角,对当前民众收入不公平感的形成机制与管理对策进行系列实证研究;采用心理测量、实验室实验和干预研究相结合的方法,并借助神经电生理的ERP技术和心理生理学的多导生理记录仪(SCR),以检验民众收入不公平感的自我-他人参照、单参照点-多参照点比较的整合性参照依赖框架;探索损失规避对多得不均等和少得不均等的非对称不公平感的根源性作用和神经生理机制;选取社区居民,操纵参照对象、参照点和得失框架,进行多轮次和多变量的干预研究,以探索减少民众收入不公平感的应对策略,并据此提出切实有效的管理对策。     

正负参照点下性别和损益情景对大学生延迟折扣的影响

大量研究表明,延迟折扣受到个体特质性和状态性因素的影响。本研究通过两个实验分别探究正参照点(实验1)和负参照点(实验2)下,特质性因素性别和状态性因素损益情景对大学生个体延迟折扣的影响。实验1研究发现,在正性参照点下,无论男女,收益情景的主观远期价值远高于损失情景。实验2研究发现,在负性参照点下,男女在损益情景的主观远期价值不同;与男性相比,女性的主观远期价值在损失情景中更高,而在收益情景中则无显著差异。本研究结果表明,在不同的参照点下,男女在损益情景中表现了不同的延迟折扣倾向;与男性相比,女性在负性参照点面对损失情景跨期选择时,更愿意选择延迟赔偿。     

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。     

基于预期理论的参照依赖

参照依赖是指个体基于某一参照点对得失价值进行判断:参照点之上,个体感受为收益,反之即为损失.参照依赖现象广泛存在于生活中的各种领域.当前,对参照依赖心理机制的解释主要有预期理论、后悔理论和三阶段参照点理论.参照依赖的影响因素主要包括经验、情绪状态、文化、目标和认知对象的特点等.未来的研究应主要集中于参照依赖的产生根源,深入探讨参照依赖的神经机制,加强动态参照点、多重参照点以及群体中参照依赖现象的研究.     

动态重复决策中先前结果对风险偏好的影响

在没有轮次限制的轮盘赌任务中考察了先前一轮及多轮的决策结果对后续决策风险偏好的影响模式, 结果表明：(1)无论盈亏, 前一轮获益或损失的程度越大后一轮的风险偏好越大; (2)先前获益后, 接下来的下注投入的金额小于先前一轮的获益金额, 先前损失后, 接下来的下注的潜在获益金额大于先前一轮的损失金额。实验结果定量地验证和拓展了私房钱效应(house money effect)和保本效应(break even effect), 在此基础上归纳出了动态重复决策中“决策前景与先前结果合并后规避损失”的决策标准, 即当决策情景具有重复性且可以自由制定决策方案时, 决策的标准是使得先前一次的获益(或损失)与下一次决策的潜在损失(或获益)合并后可以规避损失。实验结果还表明决策者仅合并最近一次的先前结果而不会合并先前连续获益或损失的结果。     

不同博弈情境下社会排斥对社会决策的影响作用

本研究借助经典的最后通牒博弈范式(UG)和独裁者博弈范式(DG),将回应者/接受者作为研究对象,考察了不同公平条件、平等条件下社会排斥对社会决策的影响作用。实验结果发现:(1)在面对高不公平性的分配方案时,被排斥组比被接纳组更倾向于拒绝接受该分配方案;(2)被排斥组对高不公平性分配方案的满意度要显著低于被接纳组;(3)被排斥组在不平等的博弈(DG)条件下对分配方案的满意度显著低于平等博弈(UG)条件下对分配方案的满意度。本研究结果说明,社会排斥情境下的被试对公平与平等因素更加敏感:在高不公平条件下,被排斥的个体表现出更少的合作互惠行为,甚至不惜放弃自身经济利益,也要惩罚博弈对方的不公平行为;此外,在不平等的博弈条件下,被排斥的个体产生了更多的消极情绪体验。本文的研究结果提高了社会决策研究的生态效度和传统决策模型的预测效度,有利于更加完整透彻地了解社会决策的影响因素。     

10～12岁儿童社会价值取向对第三方利他行为的影响：情绪的作用

为探讨10～12岁儿童社会价值取向与第三方利他行为的关系,实验1采用第三方惩罚范式,招募233名儿童被试,实验2采用第三方补偿范式,招募238名儿童被试,考察三种分配(高度不公平、中度不公平和公平)情境下社会价值取向、情绪对第三方利他行为的影响,并对比两个实验的结果。结果显示:(1)在第三方惩罚任务中亲社会儿童(相比亲自我)在高度不公平情境下拿出更多金币用于惩罚分配者;(2)在第三方补偿任务中亲社会儿童(相比亲自我)在两种不公平情境下都拿出更多金币用于补偿接受者;(3)情绪只在高度不公平情境下在社会价值取向与第三方利他行为之间发挥中介作用;(4)采用第三方补偿(相比第三方惩罚)的儿童面对不同分配时情绪波动更小,在中度不公平情境下有更多利他行为。这些结果从发展的角度为社会价值取向对第三方利他行为的影响机制提供证据,强调了亲社会取向对维护社会公平的重要作用。     

结果评价中自我体验与替代体验的参照点效应:一项赌博游戏的ERPs研究

本研究采用"投注—反馈"的虚拟赌博游戏范式,通过2个实验分别检测个体在评价自己决策结果 (实验1)和观察他人决策结果 (实验2)过程中赌注大小(即参照点)对大脑活动的影响。结果发现:(1)体验自我决策结果时,输钱比赢钱诱发更负的FRN,仅有一个负反馈(-10元)表现出以赌注为界的分离,且相对效价一样的反馈值诱发的FRN差异不显著;(2)体验他人决策结果时,无论输赢,有赌注比无赌注诱发的FRN更负;而且相对效价相同的反馈值诱发的FRN差异不显著。据此可以认为,FRN一定程度上反映了以赌注为基准的主观标准对社会信息的评价判断:自我体验中的个体对损失的敏感度远高于收益;而替代体验中的个体更倾向于将"损失更多"看作一种负性结果。     

薪酬体系框架与考核方式对个人绩效薪酬选择的影响

研究从行为决策视角, 采用情景实验法探讨了薪酬体系框架与绩效考核方式对个人绩效薪酬选择的影响。结果表明：(1)个体根据实际收入水平低于/高于内心预期收入参照点将分别形成损失/收益性的预期收入框架, 在损失性收入框架下选择风险性绩效薪酬的几率更高; (2)底薪加提成的薪酬支付模式会让个体形成收益框架, 薪酬打包的支付模式会让个体形成损失框架, 个体在薪酬打包模式下选择绩效薪酬体系的几率更高; (3)与封闭式目标的考核体系相比, 企业采用开放式目标的绩效考核会抑制预期收入框架和薪酬支付框架对个人绩效薪酬选择的影响。     

The Loss of Loss Aversion: Paying Attention to Reference Points

We agree with Gal and Rucker ( 2018 , in press) that loss aversion is not as firmly established as typically assumed. We affirm, however, the more general principle put forward within Prospect Theory (D. Kahneman & A. Tversky, 1979), which is that reference points increase people's sensitivity to objective changes in value. We show how the literatures on counterfactual thought, social comparison, and goal pursuit are consistent with the notion that reference points increase sensitivity to change in value, while not being consistent with loss aversion. We then examine, within the framework of Regulatory Focus theory (E. T. Higgins, 1997, 1998), how different reference points combine with characteristics of the actor and the situation to give rise to loss aversion (more sensitivity to negative outcomes than to positive outcomes) as well as to the reverse pattern (more sensitivity to positive outcomes than to negative outcomes). Our review suggests that the status quo, even when used as a reference point, is not necessarily neutral. It also suggests that anchor points other than the status quo may serve as reference points and that people may use more than one reference point simultaneously. More generally, we call for a critical examination of the “bad is stronger than good” principle.     

心理学对经济学的涉入——从理性自利到社会偏好的决策框架

理性认知能力与社会偏好存在紧密的关联。文章简要回顾了经济决策理论从理性模型到有限理性模型和社会偏好模型的发展进程,论述了人们理性的局限性及其根源,并进一步探讨理性认知能力与社会偏好的关系。对人类以及灵长目动物的研究显示,有限理性可能是由根源于演化的适应性机制所导致。人类不公平厌恶的起源、个体公平能力的发展规律和表征公平的大脑结构上的证据表明,理性认知能力能让人更好地抑制自私性,实现更高层次的公平。     

Choice by value encoding and value construction: processes of loss aversion

Loss aversion and reference dependence are 2 keystones of behavioral theories of choice, but little is known about their underlying cognitive processes. We suggest an additional account for loss aversion that supplements the current account of the value encoding of attributes as gains or losses relative to a reference point, introducing a value construction account. Value construction suggests that loss aversion results from biased evaluations during information search and comparison processes. We develop hypotheses that identify the influence of both accounts and examine process-tracing data for evidence. Our data suggest that loss aversion is the result of the initial direct encoding of losses that leads to the subsequent process of directional comparisons distorting attribute valuations and the final choice.     

The effects of trust in authority and procedural fairness on cooperation

The present research examined the effect of procedural fairness and trust in an authority on people's willingness to cooperate with the authority across a wide range of social situations. Prior research has shown that the presence of information about whether an authority can be trusted moderates the effect of procedural fairness. If no trust information is available, procedural fairness influences people's reactions. This is not the case when information about the trustworthiness of the authority is present. In the present article, it is argued that information about whether the authority can or cannot be trusted may also moderate the effect of procedural fairness in predicting levels of cooperation. Assuming that the use of fair procedures by authorities that cannot be trusted is less influential than is the enactment of procedures by trustworthy authorities, it is predicted that trust in authority moderates the influence of procedural fairness on cooperation in such a way that procedural fairness has a positive effect on cooperation primarily when trust in authority is high. Results from 4 studies (2 experimental studies and 2 field studies) provide supportive evidence for this interaction.     

The use of multiple reference points in risky decision making

Among psychologists and economists, prospect theory continues to be one of the most popular models of decision making. The theory's key property is reference dependence; specifically, how an individual's perception of loss or gain is dependent upon their starting point (i.e., the status quo). Although prospect theory is widely accepted, other authors have sought the inclusion of reference points besides the status quo. Initially these extensions focused on the importance of single reference points such as goals. More recently, authors have explained choice data by including multiple reference points within the value function. Multiple‐reference‐point theories generally assume that many choice situations possess an implicit or explicit goal, or point an individual will strive to obtain, and/or a minimum requirement (i.e., a “lower bound”) above which an individual will strive to stay. In two experiments, we present evidence that individuals can utilize the minimum requirement, status quo, and goal within a single risky decision task. Participants most often chose to maximize their chance of reaching reference points even when that decision was riskier, resulted in lower expected value, resulted in lower expected utility, or ran contrary to the predictions of prospect theory. Furthermore, salience and uncertainty moderated the use of goals and minimum requirements as reference points. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Multiple reference points in satisfaction and fairness assessment

Most studies of reference point effects have used a single referent, such as a price, a salary, or a target. There is considerable evidence that the judged fairness of, or satisfaction with, an outcome is significantly influenced by discrepancies from such single referents. In many settings, however, more than one reference point may be available, so the subject may be confronted simultaneously with some referents above, some at, and some below the focal outcome. Little is known about the simultaneous impact of such multiple reference points. We examine here the effects of two referents on ratings of salary satisfaction and fairness. Subjects were presented with a series of scenarios that described a salary offer made to a hypothetical MBA graduate and provided information about the salary offers made to either one or two other similar graduates. For each scenario, subjects judged how fair the focal graduate would feel the offer to be, and how satisfied he or she would be with it. Satisfaction ratings displayed asymmetric effects of comparisons: the pain associated with receiving a salary lower than another MBA is greater than the pleasure associated with a salary higher than the other student by the same amount. Fairness ratings showed a different pattern of asymmetric effects of discrepancies from the reference salaries: the focal graduate's salary was judged somewhat less fair when others received lower offers, and much less fair when others received higher offers. The asymmetric effects occurred for both reference points, suggesting that the focal salary was compared separately to each of the referents rather than to a single reference point formed by prior integration of the referents. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

公平行为的认知神经机制

大量研究采用最后通牒博弈发现人们愿意牺牲自身利益来维护公平,普遍具有不公平厌恶倾向。本文基于行为博弈任务对个体处于不同角色时的公平行为,从神经学层面做出新的解释,并对现存理论模型做了梳理。脑成像的研究发现,公平行为的相关脑区主要有负责情绪加工的脑岛和与认知控制相关的背外侧前额叶,内侧眶额皮层。前脑岛激活越大,个体拒绝不公平方案的可能性越大,而腹外侧前额叶可以调节前脑岛的活动,使个体采取更理性的方式,接受不公平分配方案。另外,睾酮素和催产素作为神经调节的激素,可以对公平行为起到调节作用,睾酮素通过抑制内侧眶额皮层的激活,增加对不公平方案的拒绝率,相反,催产素可以降低个体对于不公平方案的拒绝率,并增加个体的公平行为。     

基于预期理论的风险决策的神经机制

预期理论基于对期望效用理论的批判与发展,提出了价值函数与权重函数,对以往风险决策研究中所发现的现象进行了很好的预测与解释。预期理论的核心概念包括参照依赖、损失规避与权重函数。基于预期理论的一些决策偏差包括框架效应、禀赋效应和默认偏差也部分揭示了与人们风险决策有关的脑区。近年来,通过采用功能性核磁共振等脑成像手段对预期理论的一些核心成分进行的研究表明,涉及到人们风险决策的脑区主要有前额叶、纹状体、脑岛与杏仁核。未来的研究可以从预期理论的产生根源、个体发展以及遗传基因等角度进行进一步的探讨。     

Counting the Consequences

James's Fairness in Trade seeks to offer an account of fair trade that is “internal” to an existing practice he describes as “mutual market reliance.” This paper distinguishes several senses of the distinction between “internal” and “external” that occur in the book and asks how, in its various senses, the distinction shapes and influences judgments about the fairness of the practice.     

阶段转移事件对公平稳定性的影响

摘要：目前,组织公平的研究多集中于组织公平与组织结果变量之间关系,较少关注组织公平的稳定性。本文采取4（公平模式：公平控制/初始公平/不公平控制/初始不公平）×2（实验阶段：阶段1/阶段2）混合实验设计,探讨阶段转移事件对被试公平反应稳定性的影响。研究结果显示,公平对待导致积极的公平反应,不公平对待导致消极的公平反应;公平程序向不公平程序的转移导致对实验者信任和组织公民行为意向的评价显著降低;而不公平程序向公平程序的转移并没有导致对实验者信任和组织公民行为意向评价的显著增加,从而说明了公平反应的有限稳定性。