低阶层者的系统合理化水平更高吗?——基于社会认知视角的考察

系统合理化理论曾提出,低阶层者比高阶层者具有更高的系统合理化水平,即更认可社会体系的合理性、更支持当前社会系统。但这一论断一直存在争议。研究引入社会认知视角,考察低阶层与高阶层者系统合理化水平的差异及其机制。两个分研究得到了共同的结果:(1)低阶层者的系统合理化水平显著低于高阶层者;(2)这一差异是通过贫富归因的中介作用实现的,低阶层者系统合理化水平较低是基于其更少地认为社会贫富差距是由个人内部因素所致;(3)这一中介作用会受到个体控制感水平的调节,当控制感较低时,上述中介作用成立;但当控制感较高时,低阶层会弥合与高阶层贫富归因的差异,中介模型不成立。这些结果支持并发展了系统合理化的认知途径解释和阶层社会认知理论这两个立足于社会认知的理论观点,显示了认知因素在此问题中的重要作用,构建了更整合的阶层—归因—合理化的逻辑,并考虑了其边界因素,对于了解低阶层者的社会心态及其形成机制,包括如何改变此状况,均有一定的现实启示意义。     

Self-perceived Authenticity is Contaminated by the Valence of One’s Behavior

Two studies tested whether people are biased to infer that their positive actions are more authentic than their negative actions. In Study 1, participants identified a positive or negative personal characteristic and assessed the authenticity of past behavior that reflected that characteristic. In Study 2, people imagined themselves performing positive and negative behaviors that they authentically did or did not want to perform. Both studies showed that people’s judgments of the authenticity of their behavior were contaminated by their perceptions of the valence of their behavior even when the objective authenticity of the behavior was controlled. Future research must disentangle authenticity and positivity to determine the degree to which each contributes to positive outcomes that have been attributed to authenticity.     

Empowering and legitimizing the fundamental attribution error: Power and legitimization exacerbate the translation of role‐constrained behaviors into ability differences

Our daily interactions are influenced by the social roles we endorse. People however underestimate these role constraints in their everyday explanation relying on individual dispositions to make sense of behaviors. Two studies investigated whether this bias is exacerbated when role structure is legitimated and when power matches the advantages conferred by the social roles of a quiz game. Legitimacy as well as power increased the tendency for both advantaged (questioner) and disadvantaged (answerer) actors (Study 1) as well as naïve observers of the quiz game (Study 2) to attribute to ability the behaviors elicited by social roles. These results extend previous findings. People are more prone to explain constrained behaviors by differences in ability when role structure is legitimated and when power asymmetry matches role structure. Legitimacy and power may then play an important role in the translation of role constraints into inferences about ability.     

Psychopathy and internalism

Do psychopaths make moral judgments but lack motivation? Or are psychopaths’ judgments are not genuinely moral? Both sides of this debate seem to assume either externalist or internalist criteria for the presence of moral judgment. However, if moral judgment is a natural kind, we can arrive at a theory-neutral criterion for moral judgment. A leading naturalistic criterion suggests that psychopaths have an impaired capacity for moral judgment; the capacity is neither fully present nor fully absent. Psychopaths are therefore not counterexamples to internalism. Nonetheless, internalism is empirically problematic because it is unable to explain psychopaths’ moral deficits.     

领导对建言反应的动机感知作用机制:基于归因理论的阐释

基于归因理论,从领导对建言行为动机的认知视角,解释领导对建言差异反应的原因。当领导认为员工建言基于组织关心动机、亲社会动机时,会给予表扬/认可、奖赏、执行等积极反应;当领导认为员工建言是基于挑战动机、疏离动机、印象管理动机或自我保护动机时,会给予批评/惩罚、忽视、报复等消极反应。此外,权力距离能够调节领导对建言动机的感知,即低权力距离领导,对建言行为更为接纳、支持,会增强专业性、建言氛围与积极动机感知的关系,减弱挑战性建言与消极动机感知的关系;而高权力距离领导,倾向于绝对优势的权力和对下属的控制,会减弱专业性、可信性及建言氛围与积极动机感知的关系,增强挑战性建言与消极动机感知的关系。最后,建议未来的研究关注以下几个方面:(1)将建言作为一个过程来探讨,研究领导对建言的反应如何影响员工后续的态度和行为;(2)研究建言氛围形成的原因及其作用;(3)关注情绪在建言行为中的功能机制等。     

Cognitive adaptation and its consequences: a test of cognitive continuum theory

Cognitive Continuum Theory (CCT) is an adaptive theory of human judgement and posits a continuum of cognitive modes anchored by intuition and analysis. The theory specifies surface and depth task characteristics that are likely to induce cognitive modes at different points along the cognitive continuum. The current study manipulated both the surface (information representation) and depth (task structure) characteristics of a multiple‐cue integration threat assessment task. The surface manipulation influenced cognitive mode in the predicted direction with an iconic information display inducing a more intuitive mode than a numeric information display. The depth manipulation influenced cognitive mode in a pattern not predicted by CCT. Results indicate this difference was due to a combination of task complexity and participant satisfacing. As predicted, analysis produced a more leptokurtic error distribution than intuition. Task achievement was a function of the extent to which participants demonstrated an analytic cognitive mode index, and not a function of correspondence, as predicted. This difference was likely due to the quantitative nature of the task manipulations. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits

This paper re‐examines the commonly observed inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit. We propose that this relationship occurs because people rely on affect when judging the risk and benefit of specific hazards. Evidence supporting this proposal is obtained in two experimental studies. Study 1 investigated the inverse relationship between risk and benefit judgments under a time‐pressure condition designed to limit the use of analytic thought and enhance the reliance on affect. As expected, the inverse relationship was strengthened when time pressure was introduced. Study 2 tested and confirmed the hypothesis that providing information designed to alter the favorability of one's overall affective evaluation of an item (say nuclear power) would systematically change the risk and benefit judgments for that item. Both studies suggest that people seem prone to using an ‘affect heuristic’ which improves judgmental efficiency by deriving both risk and benefit evaluations from a common source—affective reactions to the stimulus item. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Seek and ye shall find: test results are what you hypothesize they are

Expert clinicians were given batteries of psychodiagnostic test results (Rorschach, TAT, Draw-A-Person, Bender-Gestalt, Wechsler) to analyze. For half, a battery came along with a suggestion that the person suffers from Borderline Personality disorder, and for half, that battery was accompanied by a suggestion that he suffers from Paranoid Personality disorder. In Study 1, the suggestion was made indirectly, through a background story that preceded the test results. In Study 2, the suggestion was made directly, by the instructions given. The experts saw in the tests what they hypothesized to be there. In particular, the target diagnoses were rated higher when they were hypothesized than when they were not. Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.