提议者的意图、相对收益与绝对收益对不同年龄回应者公平行为的影响

实验呈现了最后通牒博弈的3种分配情境：匿名者分配情境中, 匿名者提出方案, 且与被试分享资源, 故成熟的回应者需考虑意图、相对收益和绝对收益; 随机数生成器(RNG)分配情境中, 无关的匿名他人与被试分享资源, 故需考虑相对收益与绝对收益; 计算机分配情境中, 因计算机不能带走资源, 故只需考虑绝对收益。实验通过分析3种分配情境下回应者对同一分配方案的拒绝情况, 探讨意图、相对收益、绝对收益对公平行为的影响。结果发现：(1)年幼儿童(4~5岁)倾向于接受绝大多数分配方案; (2)年长儿童(9~11岁)在3种分配情境和多数分配方案上的拒绝率均高于其他组; (3)青少年(16~18岁)在方案2/8上的拒绝次数存在显著差异, 且匿名者分配情境显著多于RNG分配情境, 计算机分配情境显著多于零; 在3/7方案上的拒绝次数存在显著差异, 且计算机分配情境显著多于零; (4)成年人(21~24岁)在1/9和2/8方案上的拒绝次数存在显著差异, 且RNG分配情境显著多于计算机分配情境, 计算机分配情境显著多于零; 在 3/7方案上的拒绝次数具有显著差异, 且匿名者分配情境显著多于RNG分配情境, 计算机分配情境显著多于零。结果表明, (1)年幼儿童很难抵制绝对收益的吸引, 表现最为自利; (2)年长儿童更多考虑了相对收益, 能够抵制绝对收益的吸引, 并开始关注提议者的意图; (3)青少年处于关注提议者意图的重要时期, 主要基于意图与绝对收益进行决策; (4)成人的决策是意图、相对收益、绝对收益共同作用的结果。     

When does high procedural fairness reduce self-evaluations following unfavorable outcomes?: The moderating effect of prevention focus

The present studies were designed to delineate when procedural fairness would be more versus less likely to be inversely related to people’s self-evaluations in response to unfavorable outcomes. Prior theory and research have shown that: (1) the more that people assign psychological significance to unfavorable outcomes, the more likely are their self-evaluations to be adversely affected by such outcomes, and (2) people who are more prevention focused in their self-regulatory orientation assign greater psychological significance to unfavorable outcomes. Consequently, we predicted that in the face of unfavorable outcomes, the inverse relationship between procedural fairness and self-evaluations would be more likely to emerge among those who are more prevention focused. Using different conceptions or operationalizations of all of the independent and dependent variables, we found support for this prediction in three studies, spanning different cultures, contexts, and methodologies.     

Fairness and bargaining power in threshold public goods experiments

Experiments on three two‐person threshold public good provision games, namely, the simultaneous, sequential, and dictator games, are conducted to explore the motives behind giving. Players who move simultaneously are endowed with equal bargaining power, and players who move first are endowed with more bargaining power than players who move subsequently. Dictators are indubitably endowed with complete bargaining power. Since the differences between the bargaining powers of two players increase from the simultaneous to the sequential to the dictator game, comparisons among games allow us to trace whether the contribution behavior is motivated by fairness or is simply due to the strategic concern. The experimental evidence shows that the strategic concern explains the overall contribution behavior better than the motive of fairness. However, in the final round 26% of the dictators share the threshold evenly with their opponents, suggesting that some subjects do play fairly. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

模拟员工招聘过程中的有意遗忘效应

以隐私信息和非隐私信息为目标信息,以66名大学生为被试,采用类似字表范式,探讨了模拟员工招聘过程中三种提示条件下的有意遗忘效应。结果发现:①在模拟员工招聘过程中,有意遗忘效应显著,不同的提示会影响决策的结果;②简历上的与工作无关的个人隐私信息对招聘者的决策过程有一定的消极影响;③一定的干预手段可以部分消除个人隐私信息对聘用决策的消极影响,但不能完全消除。     

The paradox of the disrespected: Disrespected group members’ engagement in group-serving efforts

Previous research has demonstrated that intra-group respect can strengthen people’s group identification, and encourage them to exert themselves on behalf of their group. In the present contribution, we focus on the possibility that those who are not respected by other group members (i.e., the disrespected) can also display group beneficial behavior. Experiment 1 (N = 159) confirms this paradoxical premise and reveals that systematically disrespected group members indeed exert themselves on group-serving tasks. These findings were replicated in Experiment 2 (N = 110). Additional indicators in Experiment 2 demonstrate that the effort by systematically disrespected group members cannot be attributed to a desire to improve their acceptance in the group, but should be interpreted as attempts to assert the worth of the self separately from the group. Results are discussed in relation to the group-value model and insights on marginal group membership and social exclusion.     

Forming and reacting to overall fairness: A cross-cultural comparison

This study compared the cross-cultural formation and reactions toward overall fairness perception of employees from the US, China, Korea, and Japan. Distributive justice was related to overall fairness less strongly for Americans and Japanese than for Chinese and Koreans. In contrast, interactional justice was related to overall fairness more strongly for Americans and Japanese than for Chinese and Koreans. As expected, materialism seems to provide a coherent account of these cultural differences. In addition, overall fairness showed a stronger effect on turnover intention for Americans than for Chinese and Koreans. For job satisfaction, the effect of overall fairness was stronger for Americans than for Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese. Power distance seems to provide an adequate account of these cultural differences.     

死后生殖问题的生命伦理学思考

生物科学和医疗技术的发展使死后生殖成为可能,但是,面对世界不同地域所发生的死后生殖案例,伦理和法律的争议层出不穷。试图从生命伦理学的基本原则入手,以尊重人、行善以及公平原则为基点,结合相关问卷调查结果,探讨争议的焦点及成因,希望可以引发各个层面对相关问题的关注和讨论。     

社会决策中的公平准则及其神经机制

社会决策中的公平准则一直受到广泛的关注,经济学家和心理学家们分别从动机和认知的角度对这个课题进行了深入探索.在这些工作中,最为突出的是“均等”,“互惠”和“情绪”三个模型的提出.均等和互惠模型试图从动机角度理解个体的公平行为,而情绪模型则更强调个体在公平决策中的认知和情绪的加工过程.近年来脑成像的研究也为这些模型提供了相应的支持,其中与公平准则最密切的脑区是脑岛和背外侧前额叶:前者一般被认为是反映了个体面对不公平待遇时的负性情绪体验;而后者主要负责决策过程中的抑制控制.但这些脑区具体的功能还存在很多争议,反映了不同理论模型对特定脑区功能的不同理解.未来研究应注意三个模型之间的相互补充,以及加强多模态的脑指标的运用,并注重相关脑区的整体性,此外,公平决策行为中的个体差异,以及社会情境对其的影响也应受到重视.     

领导幽默风格对团队内部学习的影响

采用幽默风格量表（HSQ）、领导成员交换量表（LMX-16）和团队内部学习问卷,以325名事业单位员工为调查对象,研究了领导幽默风格和团队内部学习、领导成员交换的关系。结果发现：（1）亲和型领导幽默和自强型领导幽默正向影响团队内部学习,嘲讽型领导幽默和自贬型领导幽默负向影响团队内部学习。（2）亲和型领导幽默和嘲讽型领导幽默对团队内部学习的影响完全通过领导成员交换起作用,自强型领导幽默对团队内部学习的影响部分通过领导成员交换起作用。（3）自强型领导幽默与嘲讽型领导幽默通过领导成员交换对团队内部学习的影响都大于亲和型领导幽默;自强型领导幽默对团队内部学习的直接效应大于自贬型领导幽默。     

Exploring a Source of Uneven Score Equity across the Test Score Range

Score equity assessment (SEA) refers to an examination of population invariance of equating across two or more subpopulations of test examinees. Previous SEA studies have shown that score equity may be present for examinees scoring at particular test score ranges but absent for examinees scoring at other score ranges. No studies to date have performed research for the purpose of understanding why score equity can be inconsistent across the score range of some tests. The purpose of this study is to explore a source of uneven subpopulation score equity across the score range of a test. It is hypothesized that the difficulty of anchor items displaying differential item functioning (DIF) is directly related to the score location at which issues of score inequity are observed. The simulation study supports the hypothesis that the difficulty of DIF items has a systematic impact on the uneven nature of conditional score equity.