Resource scarcity aggravates ingroup bias: Neural mechanisms and cross-scenario validation

Previous studies examining the relationship between ingroup bias and resource scarcity have produced heterogeneous findings, possibly due to their focus on the allocation of positive resources (e.g. money). This study aims to investigate whether ingroup bias would be amplified or eliminated when perceived survival resources for counteracting negative stimuli are scarce. For this purpose, we exposed the participants and another confederate of the experimenters (ingroup/outgroup member) to a potential threat of unpleasant noise. Participants received some ‘relieving resources’ to counteract noise administration, the amount of which may or may not be enough for them and the confederate in different conditions (i.e. abundance vs. scarcity). First, a behavioural experiment demonstrated that intergroup discrimination manifested only in the scarcity condition; in contrast, the participants allocated similar amounts of resource to ingroup and outgroup members in the abundance condition, indicating a context-dependent allocation strategy. This behavioural pattern was replicated in a follow-up neuroimaging experiment, which further revealed that when contrasting scarcity with abundance, there was higher activation in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) as well as stronger functional connectivity of the ACC with the empathy network (including the temporoparietal junction and medial prefrontal cortex) for ingroup compared to outgroup members. We suggest that ACC activation reflects the mentalizing process toward ingroup over outgroup members in the scarcity condition. Finally, the ACC activation level significantly predicted the influence of resource scarcity on ingroup bias in hypothetical real-life situations according to a follow-up examination.     

When the poor give more than the rich: The role of resource evaluability on relative giving

Five experiments examined the role of resource evaluability on giving. We systematically varied participants' resources they and another potential donor received and whether they could donate to a recipient either by themselves or with the other donor. Participants in the relative advantage condition received more resources than the other donor, and those in the relative disadvantage condition received fewer resources than the other donor. The presence of the other donor made participants' resources evaluable and shaped giving: Relatively disadvantaged participants were proportionally more generous than advantaged participants but only when they could evaluate their resources. Neither the mere presence of others nor reputational concerns could explain the results. Exploratory mediation and moderation analyses further showed that relatively disadvantaged participants give proportionally more the higher and the more equal they perceive their status to the advantaged donor. This shows that the generosity of those who have less does depend on how they evaluate their status compared to other donors. Our results provide insights into the question of why and when resource asymmetries between donors result in prosocial giving and can influence fundraising strategies of charitable organizations.     

走神研究的理论、方法与展望

走神是一种将注意从当前主要任务转移到内部思维的认知现象,具有刺激独立、任务无关、主观自发等特点。其测量方法以主观报告法为主,同时也采用行为实验、电生理技术和认知神经科学等方法。本文重点回顾了走神的二分结构、负面结果和潜在功能等方面的研究成果。然后,在此基础上,从走神的发生机制及其与执行控制的关系角度,介绍了三个理论观点：执行资源假设、控制失败假设和资源控制假设。根据最新研究进展预测,未来对走神概念将会做更细致的区分,并考虑结合元认知监测相关理论进行研究,这不仅可以为学习者提供具体的指导建议,还将进一步加深我们对意识、元认知和注意的理解。     

工作反刍及其“双刃剑”效应

工作反刍指在没有要求其出现的情境下, 有意识的、重复发生的工作方面的相关想法, 分为工作相关情感反刍与工作相关问题解决沉思两个维度。工作反刍对个体健康、工作及幸福感的影响有“双刃剑”效应。持续性认知理论、压力认知激活模型与认知资源视角理论, 可以解释该效应的内在机制。未来研究应分析影响双刃剑效应的边界条件, 寻求减少消极效应、增加积极效应的途径, 拓展其双刃剑效应心理机制的分析视角和该效应的作用层面。     

心理学:人力资源管理和开发的一条独特途径

企业竞争中其他资源的无差异化导致了人力资源成为关注的热点问题。研究人力资源问题时,心理学应该突出自己的学科特点和优势：从个体关怀的角度出发;回答“为什么”的问题;重视理论与实务之间的联系;强调意识层面的问题。要想对管理实践起到切实的指导作用,应该掀起一场心理学理论和知识的工具化和可操作化运动。     

卫生资源优化配置的伦理要求

卫生资源是稀缺资源,卫生资源只有优化配置,才能达到我们的医学目的。卫生资源的优化配置的以公平为优先,坚持公平和效率相结合的原则。就目前所存在的和我们的医学目的不相适应的卫生资源配置方式的现状和主要问题进行分析,并提出了相应的改进方法。     

An Examination of Network Position and Childhood Relational Aggression: Integrating Resource Control and Social Exchange Theories

Applying resource control theory and social exchange theory, we examined the social network conditions under which elementary age children were likely to engage in relational aggression. Data on classroom peer networks and peer‐nominated behaviors were collected on 671 second‐ through fourth‐grade children in 34 urban, low‐income classrooms. Nested regression models with robust cluster standard errors demonstrated that the association between children's number of relationships and their levels of relational aggression was moderated by the number of relationships that their affiliates had. Children with more peer relationships (i.e., higher network centrality) exhibited higher levels of relational aggression, but only when these relationships were with peers who had fewer connections themselves (i.e., poorly connected peers). This finding remained significant even when controlling for common predictors of relational aggression including gender, overt aggression, prosocial behavior, victimization, social preference, and perceived popularity. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for advancing the literature on childhood relational aggression and their practical applications for identifying children at risk for these behaviors.     

资源保存理论在组织行为学中的应用：演变与挑战

资源保存理论(conservation of resources theory, COR)是组织行为学研究近30年中被引最高的理论之一。COR的提出源自Hobfoll对临床应激障碍的观察与思考, 历经了多次修订后该理论逐步由一个压力-反应模型发展成了一个以个体资源存量及其动态变化解释行为动因的动机理论, 形成了一个具有较广泛外延的理论体系。组织行为学是资源保存理论标志性文献的施引文献的核心来源。大量组织行为学研究对COR中的资源损失漩涡、获得螺旋等核心过程进行了实证检验, 涉及广泛的研究议题, 使COR成为了理解员工心理与行为动因的最具影响力的理论之一。COR在组织行为学中的应用面临一定的挑战, 其中有来自认知评价理论、适应理论的观点挑战, 也有其作为一个“跨界理论”带来的挑战。组织行为学研究在应用COR时应充分尊重其理论要义, 避免削足适履。     

Evidence for Opportunity Cost Neglect in the Poor

People often neglect opportunity costs: They do not fully take into account forgone alternatives outside of a particular choice set. Several scholars have suggested that poor people should be more likely to spontaneously consider opportunity costs, because budget constraints should lead to an increased focus on trade‐offs. We did not find support for this hypothesis in five high‐powered experiments (total N = 2325). The experiments used different products (both material and experiential) with both high and low prices (from $8.50 to $249.99) and different methods of reminding participants of opportunity costs. High‐income and low‐income participants showed an equally strong decrease in willingness to buy when reminded of opportunity costs, implying that both the rich and the poor neglect opportunity costs. © 2017 The Authors Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.