道德与关系惩罚对初中生公共物品困境中合作行为的影响

本研究模拟公共物品两难困境范式,以初中生为被试,通过两个实验分别考察道德惩罚和关系惩罚对不同性别和社会价值取向个体合作行为的影响。结果发现:(1)两种惩罚条件下初中生的合作水平均显著高于无惩罚条件,但当惩罚撤除后只有关系惩罚条件下的效应还存在;(2)初中女生在两种惩罚条件下的合作水平均显著高于无惩罚条件,而男生只在关系惩罚条件下出现该情况;(3)亲社会取向与亲自我取向初中生在两种惩罚阶段均表现出更高的合作水平,但在惩罚撤除后,只有亲社会取向者保持了高合作水平。这些结果表明,关系惩罚的作用较为持久,且对男生的影响更为突出,不过两种惩罚在亲社会取向者身上均显现出延后效应。     

亲社会行为中的从众效应

亲社会行为是社会关系的润滑剂, 从众心理会影响亲社会行为的出现。亲社会从众行为包括利他从众、公平偏好从众、信任从众、慷慨从众等。亲社会从众行为的心理机制包括模仿理论与动机改变理论。亲社会从众行为的神经机制包括奖赏加工与错误加工神经回路。社会价值取向、人际信任水平与人际敏感性对亲社会从众行为有一定的调节作用。未来的研究方向可以从亲社会从众效应的稳定性、个体差异、儿童及青少年的亲社会从众行为研究、临床研究以及跨文化角度入手。     

指向具体人物对象的人际信任:跨文化比较及其认知模型

本文对指向具体人物对象的人际信任作了跨文化实证比较研究,并探讨了人际信任的认知模型。使用人际信任行为量表(ITBS)测量了中国、香港及美国三地大学生的人际信任。根据三组被试对诸如父亲、哥哥、同班同学、医生和陌生人等20个人们生活中经常能够接触的人物信任程度的高低,可将这些具体人物对象归为“亲人”,“熟人”和“陌生人”三个群体。三组被试对“亲人”群体的人际信任没有显著差异,但中国被试对其它两个人物对象群体的信任要高于美国和香港被试,而后两组被试的差别则不显著。另外,利用多元回归法在人际信任与六种认知变量间建立了模型关系,发现其中只有两个变量对模型作出主要贡献,即:(1)对由信任行为而得到得回报的期望值越高;(2)得不到回报而引致损害的严重性评估越低,则一个人作出某一信任行为的可能性就越大。被试的文化背景和社会工业化程度对人际信任认知模型没有影响。     

社会价值取向与损失情境对不同时间压力下双人社会困境中合作行为的影响

为揭示双人社会困境中合作行为的影响因素,选取四种不同类型的双人社会困境,采用实验法考察社会价值取向与损失情境对不同时间压力下合作行为的影响。结果显示,亲社会个体的合作率显著高于亲自我个体的合作率,收益情境下的合作率显著高于损失情境下的合作率,在社会困境中双方冲突程度越大合作率越低;此外,高时间压力提升了亲自我个体在囚徒困境以及收益情境下信任困境中的合作率,同时降低了亲自我个体在损失情境下最大差异困境中的合作率。结果表明,社会价值取向、收益损失情境以及困境冲突程度均对合作行为的发生具有影响作用,而时间压力对合作行为的作用也同样受到三者的影响。这些发现能够为合作行为自动性的理论分歧提供新的证据。     

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。     

大学生人际信任与主观幸福感的关系:亲社会行为与攻击行为的中介作用

为考察大学生的人际信任对主观幸福感的影响机制以及亲社会行为和攻击行为的中介作用,采用人际信任问卷、亲社会行为问卷、攻击行为问卷、幸福感指数问卷对2256名大学生进行调查。研究结果显示:(1)人际信任正向预测大学生的主观幸福感,人际信任水平越高,主观幸福感越好;(2)人际信任通过亲社会行为与攻击行为的中介作用,间接影响主观幸福感。     

亲社会行为倾向的年龄差异:共情关怀和人际信任的链式中介效应

全球老龄化浪潮正在来临,亲社会行为倾向的年龄差异受到广泛关注。基于第六次世界价值观调查数据集,运用39887个全球成年样本对全球人口亲社会行为倾向的年龄差异进行检验,并探究年龄通过共情关怀和人际信任影响亲社会行为的中介机制。结果表明:全球范围内,年龄显著正向影响亲社会行为倾向,共情关怀不存在显著的年龄差异,人际信任在年龄和亲社会行为倾向之间起显著的中介效应。研究结果对考察亲社会行为倾向的年龄差异及其作用机制具有重要理论价值和实践意义。     

公共物品困境中的突显身份效应及合作动机对合作行为影响

从合作动机的激发与破坏的角度探讨公共物品困境中突显身份对合作行为的影响,同时考察社会价值取向与突显身份之间的关系。结果表明：突显合作者与突显不合作者两种方式都会提高被试的合作水平;两种突显方式的作用机制不同。突显合作者条件下,被试的合作行为受内在动机和外在动机的共同影响。而突显不合作者则会破坏被试合作的内在动机,外在动机对提高合作行为起主要作用;突显合作者条件下,合作取向的被试更多受内在动机的影响,而非合作取向的被试则更多受外在动机的影响。在突显不合作者的条件下,合作取向和非合作取向被试的合作行为都受外在动机的影响较大。     

信任及其对公共财物两难博弈中合作行为影响

社会两难的行为动机研究认为,害怕和贪婪是人们选择不合作的原因。信任的心理学研究为社会两难的合作行为提供了另一种观点,即害怕被利用的背后实际上体现了博弈者对对方的信任的缺失。鉴于传统社会两难范式存在难以区分信任和合作两个因素的问题,本研究设计了“信任一合作”二阶段模拟实验,通过操作重复信托博弈中的信息反馈,研究虚拟多人信托博弈中初始信任和基于经验的信任对随后的公共财物两难博弈中合作行为的影响,结果发现：（1）初始信任对基于经验的信任的建立具有一定的积极影响,但是它对合作行为的作用远不如随后的基于经验的信任;（2）基于经验的信任水平高的被试在随后的公共财物两难博弈中也表现出较高的合作行为。     

不对称社会困境中社会价值取向对合作的影响

以往研究表明, 社会价值取向对社会困境中合作行为变异的解释量不高。本研究指出, 初始资源配置导致个体处于某种优劣势位置上, 从而影响社会价值取向不同的个体的合作行为。研究设置了两人互动和多人互动两种情境, 通过变化被试所拥有的初始资源的相对价值或相对数量来操作优势差异, 检验亲社会者和亲自我者在社会困境中的心理与行为差异。研究结果表明, 在初始资源处于相对劣势位置时, 亲社会者比亲自我者表现出更高的合作水平。     

Undermining trust and cooperation: The paradox of sanctioning systems in social dilemmas

Sanctioning systems in social dilemmas are often meant to increase trust in others and to increase cooperation. We argue, however, that sanctioning systems may also give people the idea that others act in their own self-interest and undermine the belief that others are internally motivated to cooperate. We developed the “Removing The Sanction” paradigm and a new trust manipulation, and showed in three experiments that when there is a sanction on defection, trust in others being internally motivated to cooperate is undermined: Participants who had experienced the presence of a sanctioning system trusted fellow group members less than participants who had not. In a similar vein, the sanction undermined cooperation when trust was initially high. The implications of these paradoxical findings are discussed.     

Palatable Punishment in Real‐World Social Dilemmas? Punishing Others to Increase Cooperation Among the Unpunished1

Social‐dilemma research has shown that imposing sanctions on defection may increase cooperation, a principle behind attempts to solve real‐world social dilemmas. Yet sanctioning systems are often difficult to implement: They are unpopular and often have large surveillance and enforcement costs. A new sanctioning system, intentionally punishing defection intermittently for some but not all group members, is shown to increase cooperation among those not punished, a finding labeled the spillover effect. This study suggests that the effect cannot be attributed simply to cooperative tendencies, as factors affecting cooperation do not affect the effect's size. The benefits of such a sanctioning system, which preserves the characteristics of social dilemmas, could include minimization of surveillance and enforcement costs, and greater public acceptability.     

When sanctions fail to increase cooperation in social dilemmas: considering the presence of an alternative option to defect

Previous social dilemma research has shown that sanctioning defection may enhance cooperation. The authors argue that this finding may have resulted from restricting participants to two behaviors (cooperation and defection). In this article, the authors introduce the concept of a "social trilemma" (a social dilemma in which an alternative option to defect is present) and tested the effect of a sanction. The authors show that a sanction only increased cooperation and collective interests in the traditional social dilemma. In a social trilemma, the sanction failed because it caused some people to choose the alternative option to defect. Moreover, the results indicate that this was especially the case when people did not expect fellow group members to cooperate. In this case, the sanction even worked counterproductive because it decreased collective interests. It is concluded that allowing individuals to consider alternative options to defect can reveal the potential detrimental effects of sanctioning systems for the collective.     

Blinded by trust in close others: Examining the effect of social closeness on cooperative behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic

In the context of public health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential that individuals cooperate by complying with preventive measures (e.g., wearing a mask). The current research examines how high trust in close others is linked to less cooperation—that is, less compliance with measures—and thus, undermines collective interests. Specifically, we test whether individuals are less willing to comply with preventive measures when interacting with close others they trust. We conducted two experiments in which participants read a vignette depicting a social interaction with either close others (e.g., family) or strangers. Participants had to report the extent to which they would (1) trust the other people in the situation and (2) comply with the mask wearing and physical distancing measures during this interaction. In both experiments, we find that when individuals are considering an interaction with close others, they report experiencing higher trust which is then linked to lower compliance with preventive measures. In Experiment 2, we further demonstrate that participants report less compliance with preventive measures around close others, even when they perceive non-compliance with the measures as morally “wrong”. Our findings shed light on the challenges that compliance with preventive measures poses during social interactions in a context of high trust.     

社会公平感、机构信任度与公共合作意向

社会公平从古至今都是人类追求的崇高社会理想。对社会公平的感知即社会公平感直接决定着个体的机构信任,并影响其公共合作参与。本研究将社会公平感分为分配公平和程序公平,将机构信任度分为工具信任和动机信任,采用实验室情境设计的方法,引入最后通牒博弈和免责博弈范式,通过2个实验系统探讨"公正无私,一言而万民齐"的因果机制。研究发现分配公平与程序公平正作用于个体的公共合作态度与意向,在此基础上建立起公共合作的双路径模型:外部路径由分配公平产生工具信任和动机信任,进而触发公共合作;内部路径由程序公平产生动机信任和工具信任,进而触发公共合作;二者结合构成个体参与公共合作的双动力系统。双路径模型的适用性在组织情境和社会情境下均得到了支持。     

社会困境中合作行为的阶层差异：自我与他人的双重视角

为了探究个体自身与他人的社会阶层对个体在社会困境中合作行为的影响及其作用机制,本研究通过问卷和实验研究来考察自身阶层的行为效应、互动对象阶层的调节效应以及信任有中介的调节作用。研究发现：（1）低阶层者倾向于比高阶层者表现出更多的合作行为;（2）感知到的互动对象阶层对不同阶层个体的合作行为存在显著的调节效应;（3）个体对互动对象的信任水平（即对他人合作行为的预期）对此调节效应起到中介作用。     

Social identification effects in social dilemmas: a transformation of motives

Three experimental studies were conducted to examine two alternative explanations for the widely established positive effect of social identification in promoting cooperation in social dilemmas. We hypothesised that social identification effects could be either ascribed to (1) an increase in the value assigned to the collective good (i.e. goal‐transformation hypothesis) or (2) an enhancement of trust in the cooperation of other group members (i.e. goal‐amplification hypothesis). To disentangle these two explanations, we examined the effects of social identification on the contributions to a public good of people with a different social value orientation (i.e. pre‐existing differences in preferred outcome distribution between self and others). Following the goal transformation hypothesis, we predicted that an increased group identification would raise contributions, in particular for people essentially concerned with their personal welfare (i.e. pro‐self value orientation). Alternatively, following the goal amplification hypothesis it was expected that increased group identification would primarily affect decisions of people concerned with the collective welfare (i.e. prosocial value orientation). The results of all three studies provided support for the goal‐transformation rather than goal‐amplification hypothesis, suggesting that ‘selfish’ individuals can be encouraged to cooperate by increasing the salience of their group membership. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The effect of decision timing on the willingness to costly reward cooperation and punish noncooperation: Sanctioning the past,the present,or the future

Numerous studies have demonstrated that sanctions can promote cooperation. However, it is important to know not only that sanctions can work but also under what conditions people are actually willing to sanction cooperation positively (i.e., reward) or noncooperation negatively (i.e., punish). In this article, we demonstrate that people use sanctions less often and sanction more mildly when they decide about sanctioning before (instead of after) the occurrence of others' (non)cooperation (Experiments 1 and 2), regardless of whether they decide directly afterwards or after a time delay (Experiment 2). Moreover, we reveal that beforehand (as compared with afterwards) people have not yet formed clear sanctioning preferences (Experiment 3). These findings corroborate our reasoning that the decision environment beforehand induces nonconsequential reasoning and thereby hampers people's willingness to sanction. We discuss the theoretical, methodological, and practical implications of our work.     

两难中合作行为研究的回顾和展望

如何预测人们将做出合作行为,是社会两难决策研究中重要的问题。该文回顾了社会两难研究的进展情况,包括社会两难的特征、来源、类型、研究方法和理论基础;综述了两难中影响合作行为的个人因素和情景因素,重点介绍了目前存在争议的制裁系统和合作的关系研究,以及为什么它们之间会表现出一些自相矛盾之处;对合作行为研究存在的问题进行了初步探讨,未来的研究将更侧重于合作决策的理论建构、文化内涵和认知过程的揭示     

Sanctions and moral judgments: The moderating effect of sanction severity and trust in authorities

In order to induce people to follow rules, sanctions are often introduced. In this paper we argue for the importance of studying the positive influence of sanctioning systems on people's moral convictions regarding the rule advocated by the sanction and of studying factors that moderate this influence. In three experiments we tested the influence of sanction severity and showed that severe sanctions evoke stronger moral judgments with regard to rule‐breaking behavior and stronger social disapproval towards rule‐breakers than mild sanctions. This was particularly the case when trust in authorities is high rather than low. Implications of these findings are discussed. Also, a framework is proposed to understand the possible circumstances that determine whether sanctions either increase or decrease moral norms. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.