第三方惩罚的神经机制：来自经颅直流电刺激的证据

第三方惩罚既是社会规范在群体得以维系的基石, 也是个体维护社会规范的体现。当前关注社会规范的神经研究大多基于第二方惩罚的独裁者或最后通牒实验框架, 缺乏对第三方维护社会规范过程中相关脑区活动的探索, 对这一过程的内在神经机制也不清楚。本文基于第三方惩罚的独裁者博弈框架, 对右侧背外侧前额叶区域(DLPFC)进行不同极性的经颅直流电刺激(tDCS), 同时依据第三方是否需要为其惩罚付出成本设计了零成本和有成本两个实验任务。结果发现, 第三方在零成本任务的情绪反应和惩罚显著受到tDCS设置的影响, 且阴极刺激显著提升了第三方的惩罚值, 这表明情绪机制对第三方惩罚有着重要影响。另外, 第三方在零成本和有成本任务中的惩罚差异在不同tDCS设置之间也存在显著差异, 这与第三方惩罚还受到自利机制影响的观点相符。本文率先为右侧DLPFC活动影响第三方惩罚提供了神经层面的证据, 且支持了第三方对社会规范的遵从与其负性情绪反应和自利加工密切相关的机制解释。     

第三方惩罚的演化与认知机制

第三方惩罚一般是指当违反社会规范的行为与自身利益无关时,个体牺牲自我利益来惩罚违规者的行为。最近的研究发现,对于个体而言,第三方惩罚是一种具有适应性的信号,包括建立良好的声誉以及威慑违规者。不同情境下第三方惩罚的功能有所差异,它是一种特殊的利他行为。第三方惩罚依赖于多个系统,涉及情绪反应、共情等社会认知能力以及认知控制等中央执行能力。探讨该行为的演化和认知机制也能贡献于个体、群体和人际层面的社会心理服务工作。     

Characteristics of affected third parties and cooperative behavior in social dilemmas

ABSTRACT

The studies described in this article explore the influence of an under-emphasized determinant of cooperative behavior in social dilemmas: affected third parties. Two experiments examined the effect of characteristics of third parties on individual cooperative behavior in social dilemmas, and identified mechanisms associated with these relationships. Study 1 demonstrated that third-party need affects individual cooperative behavior, and tested prosocial motivation and intra-group trust as mediators of this relationship. Study 2 provided further elaboration by demonstrating that individual cooperative behavior was reduced when a needy third party was low on reliability, and by showing that prosocial motivation and intra-group trust mediated this relationship. This research connects the literatures on individual cooperation in social dilemmas and relational job design, and demonstrates why third parties influence individuals’ cooperative behavior.     

人情与公正的抉择:社会距离对第三方干预的影响

第三方干预(third-party intervention)是一种重要的利他行为,它包括惩罚和补偿两种措施。本研究结合情境性问卷与实验法,采用修改后的独裁者博弈范式(Dictator Game,DG),让被试作为第三方对朋友或者陌生人的不公平行为进行干预,考察社会距离对第三方干预的影响。研究发现:(1)对于朋友提出的不公平方案,个体对其的惩罚轻于陌生人,而对第二方(无权者)的补偿没有显著差异。(2)个体对朋友的不公平提议的公平性判断高于陌生人,但提议引发的情绪体验没有显著差异。上述结果表明,社会距离可能通过影响个体对不公平行为的公平感知,进而影响其第三方干预行为。     

Outsourcing inspiration: The performance effects of ideological messages from leaders and beneficiaries

Although ideological messages are thought to inspire employee performance, research has shown mixed results. Typically, ideological messages are delivered by leaders, but employees may be suspicious of ulterior motives—leaders may merely be seeking to inspire higher performance. As such, we propose that these messages are often more effective when outsourced to a more neutral third party—the beneficiaries of employees’ work. In Study 1, a field quasi-experiment with fundraisers, ideological messages from a beneficiary—but not from two leaders—increased performance. In Study 2, a laboratory experiment with an editing task, participants achieved higher task and citizenship performance when an ideological message was delivered by a speaker portrayed as a beneficiary vs. a leader, mediated by suspicion. In Study 3, a laboratory experiment with a marketing task, the beneficiary source advantage was contingent on message content: beneficiaries motivated higher task and citizenship performance than leaders with prosocial messages but not achievement messages.     

第三方惩罚中的规范错觉：基于公正世界信念的解释

惩罚规范在一定程度上会影响个体的惩罚行为, 但个体对惩罚规范的感知与实际规范之间可能存在差异, 这被称为规范错觉。为了更好地从这一角度理解第三方惩罚, 我们需要回答的是：第三方惩罚中是否存在规范错觉?如果存在, 其方向如何?会对个体自身的惩罚行为产生何种影响?实验1 (N = 449)和实验2 (N = 134)的结果表明, 在违规情境中, 人们往往低估了他人的惩罚水平, 这导致自身较低的惩罚行为。实验3 (N = 164)和实验4 (N = 284)进一步发现, 较弱的公正世界信念导致人们对他人惩罚水平的低估, 从而影响了自身的惩罚行为, 而社会距离调节了公正世界信念对规范错觉的影响。上述结果表明, 规范错觉会受到内部(公正世界信念)和外部(社会距离)两个参照点的影响, 同时也在一定程度上说明第三方惩罚是一种注重维护规范的积极行为、而非注重个人收益的策略行为。     

Les vicissitudes du préjudice d’agrément

The fate of the loss of amenity has always been related to the right of recourse of the third-party payers against the person in charge of the damage. The loss of amenity has been recognized by Law of the 27 December 1973. It was at that time that it was excluded from the recourse of the third-party payers. It was not the case of the physiological injuries which had always been submitted to the recourse of the third-party payers. At first, these injuries had included the disorders in the conditions of existence. But in 2005, the Dintilhac nomenclature adopted a restrictive conception of the loss of amenity. This damage is now defined as the impossibility to practice regularly a specific activity of sport or leisure. In addition, the Law of 21 December 2006 imposed on third-party payers to exercise their action only on pecuniary damage. The physiological injuries were therefore excluded from this action. The strict definition of loss of amenity is both adopted in Civil Law and Social law. But in these two areas, the analysis of the judicial practice reveals that it is undermined the right for the full repair of the victims under their loss of amenity. Accordingly, the question of the opportunity to widen once more the definition of the loss of amenity arises today.     

分配情境下的婴幼儿公平敏感性

公平一直是道德规范领域的中心议题。公平敏感性是指个体对感知到的公平和不公平的稳定而个性化的反应, 随着自身成长具有一定可变性。本文首先介绍了公平敏感性的概念界定以及研究方法, 认为第三方范式的引入使得婴幼儿研究的结果更加积极; 然后对分配情境下公平敏感性的影响因素进行了探讨, 如社会情境、社会关系、分配资源等; 最后, 指出未来研究应将公平敏感性概念具体化, 对分配情境下各因素进行协调整合, 匹配跨文化跨年龄组条件以系统探讨婴幼儿公平敏感性。     

不同分配情境下儿童公平行为的发展

为探究儿童在不同利益对比情境以及与己利益无关情境中的公平行为,研究呈现了自我任务的劣势博弈、优势博弈、冲突博弈以及第三方任务博弈四种分配情境。自我任务中儿童需要为自己与另一名匿名儿童迫选方案,第三方任务中则需为两名匿名儿童迫选方案。结果发现:(1)劣势博弈中所有年龄组均倾向于选择公平方案,而非劣势方案;(2)优势博弈中,8岁、10岁组选择公平方案的人显著多于优势方案,而4岁、6岁组均无显著差异;(3)冲突博弈中,4岁、6岁组选择优势方案的人显著多于劣势方案,而8岁、10岁组均无显著差异;(4)第三方博弈中, 8岁、10岁组选择公平方案的人显著多于不公平方案,而4岁、6岁组均无显著差异。这表明,4岁~6岁儿童尚未真正获得公平观念,且以获得个人利益为主;而8岁是真正获得公平观念的转折年龄,8~10岁儿童对人对己均坚持公平原则,且表现出利他倾向。     

Impact and the art of motivation maintenance: The effects of contact with beneficiaries on persistence behavior

We tested the hypothesis that employees are willing to maintain their motivation when their work is relationally designed to provide opportunities for respectful contact with the beneficiaries of their efforts. In Experiment 1, a longitudinal field experiment in a fundraising organization, callers in an intervention group briefly interacted with a beneficiary; callers in two control groups read a letter from the beneficiary and discussed it amongst themselves or had no exposure to him. One month later, the intervention group displayed significantly greater persistence and job performance than the control groups. The intervention group increased significantly in persistence (142% more phone time) and job performance (171% more money raised); the control groups did not. Experiments 2 and 3 used a laboratory editing task to examine mediating mechanisms and boundary conditions. In Experiment 2, respectful contact with beneficiaries increased persistence, mediated by perceived impact. In Experiment 3, mere contact with beneficiaries and task significance interacted to increase persistence, mediated by affective commitment to beneficiaries. Implications for job design and work motivation are discussed.