Rivals without a cause? Relative performance feedback creates destructive competition despite aligned incentives

Whether people compete or cooperate with each other has consequences for their own performance and that of organizations. To explain why people compete or cooperate, previous research has focused on two main factors: situational outcome structures and personality types. Here, we propose that—above and beyond these two factors—situational cues, such as the format in which people receive feedback, strongly affect whether they act competitively, cooperatively, or individualistically. Results of a laboratory experiment support our theorizing: After receiving ranking feedback, both students and experienced managers treated group situations with cooperative outcome structures as competitive and were in consequence willing to forgo guaranteed financial gains to pursue a—financially irrelevant—better rank. Conversely, in dilemma situations, feedback based on the joint group outcome led to more cooperation than ranking feedback. Our study contributes to research on competition, cooperation, interdependence theory, forced ranking, and the design of information environments.     

Provision of step-level public goods with continuous contribution

Twelve groups of five subjects each participated in a nonco-operative game in which each member of a group receives the same endowment and must then decide independently and anonymously how much of it to contribute to the group benefit. Regardless of the size of his or her contribution, each member receives the same reward if, and only if, the sum of contributions is equal to or larger than a prespecified provision threshold. The results show that the level of contribution depends on the provision threshold, and that it increases when contributions are not restricted to be all-or-none. We present, discuss, and competitively test two models for this class of social dilemmas, one postulating maximization of expected utility and the other yielding an equitable solution.     

Visual context processing and its development in gamers and non-gamers

Visual context processing was investigated in both action video game players and nonplayers using the Ebbinghaus illusion task (N = 312, 39.4% female) in a cross-sectional study design. When presented in context, players showed markedly poorer target size discrimination accuracy compared with nonplayers in the 6-, 7-, 8-, and 9-years old age groups, but this difference was reduced in 10-years old group and diminished in adults. When presented in isolation (no-context), the two groups displayed similar performance in all age groups. Furthermore, nonplayers (linear) and players (bell curve) showed profoundly different age-related differences in context processing. These findings provide evidence that players might have enhanced perceptual bias to process visual context in the transition from early childhood to early adolescence, and the differences between the two groups start at early ages and continue with distinct developmental profiles.     

RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF TEACHER ATTENTION AND THE “GOOD BEHAVIOR GAME” IN MODIFYING DISRUPTIVE CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR1

A variety of behavioral procedures have been employed in recent years to modify disruptive classroom behavior. Such methods have been developed with the belief that curtailing disruptive behavior would strengthen positive classroom performance. In this study, two procedures, the good behavior game and the teacher-attention method, were compared to determine short-run effectiveness. Four teachers (two fourth-grade and two fifth-grade) implemented both methods in their classrooms over a five-week period. Presentation of methods was alternated in a counterbalanced design to control for order effects. Each of the four classrooms consisted of 25 students. A time-sampling procedure was used to record the presence or absence of disruptive behavior within 15-second intervals. Disruptive behavior was defined as any talking-out or out-of-seat behavior without permission. The results indicated that both procedures were effective in modifying disruptive classroom behavior, but that the good behavior game reduced disruptive behavior significantly better than the teacher-attention method. In addition, all teachers preferred the game to the teacher-attention procedure. This reaction seemed related to the effort involved in initiating the two activities. The good behavior game required less effort on the teacher's part. However, use of the game alone raises certain ethical considerations. One such issue involves abuse of peer pressure. Also, there is a possibility that negative rules may tend to promote resentment. Positively stated rules would ameliorate that problem. Another relates to the possibility that some teachers might be carried away by the ease of the game's implementation to the extent that behavior control becomes the primary objective in the classroom. As a result, one might consider use of the game to maximize short-term change, but then phase out this procedure in favor of another method (e.g., teacher attention) for long-run effects.     

计算模型视角下信任形成的心理和神经机制——基于信任博弈中投资者的角度

人际信任渗透在社会交互的各个方面, 是促进和维持合作的重要基石。以往研究者借助信任博弈范式, 主要探讨了人际信任的理论模型、生物基础和影响因素等方面。近年来, 研究者开始将计算模型应用于信任博弈的数据分析中, 深入挖掘人际信任行为背后的心理机制, 将计算模型与神经影像技术结合, 加深对信任行为背后脑机制的理解。目前将计算模型应用于信任博弈范式中的研究主要针对“信任是如何形成的”这一科学问题, 未来要进一步发展计算模型方法, 结合非侵入性脑刺激技术, 应用于精神疾病人群中, 以深入理解正常和异常信任形成的心理和神经机制。     

动作视频游戏对发展性阅读障碍者阅读技能的影响及其内在机制

发展性阅读障碍是一种在获得阅读技能方面的特殊困难, 这种障碍会严重影响个体的发展, 如何帮助发展性阅读障碍者改善其阅读技能是近年来研究的焦点。传统的干预方法主要针对发展性阅读障碍者的语音缺陷, 这类方法存在一些问题, 如费时费力、给阅读障碍者带来阅读压力等。近年来, 大部分研究表明通过趣味性的动作视频游戏训练可以显著地提高发展性阅读障碍者的阅读技能, 但是其背后的机制尚不明确。基于大细胞通路缺陷理论框架, 从视觉空间注意、注意跨通道转换、视觉运动加工等方面来梳理动作视频游戏与阅读之间的关系, 揭示了动作视频游戏训练对阅读效率影响的可能内在机制。未来的研究可以在大细胞通路缺陷理论的框架下, 深入分析动作视频游戏改善阅读的神经机制, 并尝试开发更适合发展性阅读障碍者的干预程序。     

问题性网络游戏使用青少年未来取向的助推研究

摘要：以问题性网络游戏使用青少年为研究对象,基于锚定效应助推国民身心健康的理论前提和态度改变理论视角,通过实验1和实验2分别建立未来取向内部锚和未来取向外部锚,检验未来取向内部锚和外部锚对减少问题性网络游戏使用青少年游戏时间的有效性。结果表明,未来取向内部和外部的助推方式,均能够有效促进问题性网络游戏使用青少年游戏时间的减少,提高了决策效用。     

同伴特点如何影响人们的合作与冲突行为?

人类的生存繁衍依赖于人们之间的相互合作,合作与冲突行为的研究近年来成为心理学的研究热点。本研究通过实验程序操纵Chicken Game中博弈同伴的特点,考察个体在社会困境中面对不同特点同伴时的合作行为。结果发现：(1)同伴道义论组和功利论组总和解率没有显著差异,同伴竞争组和合作组的总和解率也没有显著差异。(2)在与道义论以及合作型的同伴互动时,个体的行为没有明显受到上次博弈反馈的影响。(3)当同伴为功利论时,相比于上次博弈个体选择和解而同伴选择进攻,双方都选择和解时个体在当前博弈中更倾向于和解;(4)在同伴竞争组中,相比于上次博弈个体选择进攻而同伴选择和解,双方都选择和解时被试在当前博弈中会更倾向于和解。实验结果表明个体在博弈任务中会受到同伴特点的影响,并且同伴在博弈中的行为特点的影响更为显著。本研究从同伴特点来考察个体的合作行为,揭示了影响个体博弈行为的一种因素。     

Evaluating adult interaction during the Step It UP! game to increase physical activity in children

A recent intervention, the Step it UP! game (Galbraith & Normand, 2017), consists of an interdependent group contingency to increase student physical activity. In addition, previous research demonstrated that adult interaction may reinforce physical activity (Larson et al., 2014). We extended research on the Step it UP! game by comparing the effects of no game, Step it UP! game, and Step it UP! game plus adult interaction on the number of steps taken by participants in a third-grade classroom during recess. Overall, 19 of the 25 participants took more steps during the Step it UP! game plus adult interaction compared to the Step it UP! game and no-game recesses. Furthermore, 20 participants preferred the Step it UP! game plus adult interaction. Results suggest that adult interaction can enhance the effects of the Step it UP! game to increase physical activity.