社会价值取向与损失情境对不同时间压力下双人社会困境中合作行为的影响

doi:10.12139/j.1672-0628.2023.01.014

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为揭示双人社会困境中合作行为的影响因素，选取四种不同类型的双人社会困境，采用实验法考察社会价值取向与损失情境对不同时间压力下合作行为的影响。结果显示，亲社会个体的合作率显著高于亲自我个体的合作率，收益情境下的合作率显著高于损失情境下的合作率，在社会困境中双方冲突程度越大合作率越低；此外，高时间压力提升了亲自我个体在囚徒困境以及收益情境下信任困境中的合作率，同时降低了亲自我个体在损失情境下最大差异困境中的合作率。结果表明，社会价值取向、收益损失情境以及困境冲突程度均对合作行为的发生具有影响作用，而时间压力对合作行为的作用也同样受到三者的影响。这些发现能够为合作行为自动性的理论分歧提供新的证据。

关键词: 社会困境, 合作, 社会价值取向, 损失情境

Abstract:

To reveal influencing factors of cooperative behavior in two-person social dilemmas, this study explored the impact of social value orientation and loss context on cooperative behavior under different time pressure, by using four different types of two-person social dilemmas. Results showed that the cooperation rate of the pro-social was significantly higher than that of the pro-self, and participants cooperated more in the gain context than in the loss context. Besides, with the increase of conflict level of social dilemmas, the cooperation rate decreased. Additionally, high time pressure increased the cooperation rate of the pro-self in the prisoner’s dilemma and trust dilemma (in the gain context) but reduced the cooperation rate of the pro-self in the assurance dilemma (in the loss context). These results indicate that cooperative behavior is influenced by participants’ social value orientation, the loss context, and the conflict degree of social dilemmas; and the effect of time pressure on cooperative behavior is also affected by these three factors. These findings provide new evidence for the argument that cooperative behavior in social dilemmas is an intuitive response.

Key words: social dilemmas, cooperation, social value orientation, loss context

中图分类号:

B849

孙鹏, 凌晓丽. 社会价值取向与损失情境对不同时间压力下双人社会困境中合作行为的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2023, 21(1): 94-101.

Peng SUN, Xiaoli LING. The Influence of Social Value Orientation and Loss Context on Cooperation in Social Dilemmas Under Different Time Pressure[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2023, 21(1): 94-101.

图/表 3

参考文献

	凌晓丽, 孙鹏损失情境下社会困境中的合作行为. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17 (3): 377- 383.
	刘长江, 张跃, 郝芳, 刘采梦, 丁絮, 石雨利益冲突情境中社会行为的自动激活: 合作还是利己. 心理科学进展, 2016, 24 (12): 1897- 1906.
	刘映杰, 段亚妮, 刘昊馨, 刘佳, 王赫得失情境下第三方惩罚决策差异的神经机制: 基于rTMS的研究. 心理科学, 2022, 45 (4): 942- 952.
	王晓明, 王亚如, 庞晓文, 赵勤英时间限制对合作的影响: 有调节的链式中介模型. 心理科学, 2022, 45 (2): 425- 432.
	熊承清, 许佳颖, 马丹阳, 刘永芳囚徒困境博弈中对手面部表情对合作行为的影响及其作用机制. 心理学报, 2021, 53 (8): 919- 932.
	Bear, A., & Rand, D. G. Intuition, deliberation, and the evolution of cooperation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016, 113 (4): 936- 941. DOI
	Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford Press.
	Cornelissen, G., Dewitte, S., & Warlop, L. Are social value orientations expressed automatically? Decision making in the dictator game. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2011, 37 (8): 1080- 1090. DOI
	De Dreu, C. K. W., Fariña, A., Gross, J., & Romano, A. Prosociality as a foundation for intergroup conflict. Current Opinion in Psychology, 2022, 44, 112- 116. DOI
	Edwards, W. (1954). The theory of decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 51(4), 380–417.
	Emonds, G., Declerck, C. H., Boone, C., Vandervliet, E. J. M., & Parizel, P. M. The cognitive demands on cooperation in social dilemmas: An fMRI study. Social Neuroscience, 2012, 7 (5): 494- 509. DOI
	Gong, X., Huang, Y. X., Wang, Y., & Luo, Y. J. Revision of the Chinese facial affective picture system. Chinese Mental Health Journal, 2011, 25 (1): 40- 46.
	Grossmann, T., Missana, M., & Vaish, A. Helping, fast and slow: Exploring intuitive cooperation in early ontogeny. Cognition, 2020, 196, 104144. DOI
	Halevy, N., Chou, E. Y., & Murnighan, J. K. Mind games: The mental representation of conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2012, 102 (1): 132- 148. DOI
	Halevy, N., & Katz, J. J. Conflict templates: Thinking through interdependence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2013, 22 (3): 217- 224. DOI
	Hamlin, J. K., Wynn, K., & Bloom, P. Social evaluation by preverbal infants. Nature, 2007, 450 (7169): 557- 559. DOI
	Handley, C., & Mathew, S. Human large-scale cooperation as a product of competition between cultural groups. Nature Communications, 2020, 11 (1): 702. DOI
	Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., Gintis, H., ... Tracer, D. “Economic man” in cross-cultural perspective: Behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2005, 28 (6): 795- 815. DOI
	Henrich, J., & Muthukrishna, M. The origins and psychology of human cooperation. Annual Review of Psychology, 2021, 72 (1): 207- 240. DOI
	Knoch, D., Schneider, F., Schunk, D., Hohmann, M., & Fehr, E. Disrupting the prefrontal cortex diminishes the human ability to build a good reputation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2009, 106 (49): 20895- 20899. DOI
	Lohse, J., Goeschl, T., & Diederich, J. (2014). Giving is a question of time: Response times and contributions to a real world public good(Discussion Paper Series No. 566). University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
	Martinsson, P., Myrseth, K. O. R., & Wollbrant, C. Social dilemmas: When self-control benefits cooperation. Journal of Economic Psychology, 2014, 45, 213- 236. DOI
	Myrseth, K. O. R., & Fishbach, A. Self-control: A function of knowing when and how to exercise restraint. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2009, 18 (4): 247- 252. DOI
	Novemsky, N., & Kahneman, D. The boundaries of loss aversion. Journal of Marketing Research, 2005, 42 (2): 119- 128. DOI
	Piovesan, M., & Wengström, E. Fast or fair? A study of response times. Economics Letters, 2009, 105 (2): 193- 196. DOI
	Rand, D. G. Cooperation, fast and slow: Meta-analytic evidence for a theory of social heuristics and self-interested deliberation. Psychological Science, 2016, 27 (9): 1192- 1206. DOI
	Rand, D. G., Greene, J. D., & Nowak, M. A. Spontaneous giving and calculated greed. Nature, 2012, 489 (7416): 427- 430. DOI
	Rand, D. G., & Kraft-Todd, G. T. Reflection does not undermine self-interested prosociality. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 2014, 8, 300. DOI
	Rilling, J. K., DeMarco, A. C., Hackett, P. D., Chen, X., Gautam, P., Stair, S., ... Pagnoni, G. Sex differences in the neural and behavioral response to intranasal oxytocin and vasopressin during human social interaction. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 2014, 39, 237- 248. DOI
	Rilling, J. K., Gutman, D. A., Zeh, T. R., Pagnoni, G., Berns, G. S., & Kilts, C. D. A neural basis for social cooperation. Neuron, 2002, 35 (2): 395- 405. DOI
	Rosati, A. G., Dinicola, L. M., & Buckholtz, J. W. Chimpanzee cooperation is fast and independent from self-control. Psychological Science, 2018, 29 (11): 1832- 1845. DOI
	Schulz, J. F., Fischbacher, U., Thöni, C., & Utikal, V. Affect and fairness: Dictator games under cognitive load. Journal of Economic Psychology, 2014, 41, 77- 87. DOI
	Shaw, A., & Olson, K. R. Children discard a resource to avoid inequity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2012, 141 (2): 382- 395. DOI
	Silk, J. B., & House, B. R. The evolution of altruistic social preferences in human groups. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2016, 371 (1687): 20150097. DOI
	Sun, P., Zheng, L., Li, L., Guo, X. Y., Zhang, W. D., & Zheng, Y. J. The neural responses to social cooperation in gain and loss context. PLoS One, 2016, 11 (8): e0160503. DOI
	Thielmann, I., Spadaro, G., & Balliet, D. Personality and prosocial behavior: A theoretical framework and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 2020, 146 (1): 30- 90. DOI
	van Dijk, E., & De Dreu, C. K. W. Experimental games and social decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 2021, 72 (1): 415- 438. DOI
	van Lange, P. A. M., De Bruin, E. M. N., Otten, W., & Joireman, J. A. Development of prosocial, individualistic, and competitive orientations: Theory and preliminary evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1997, 73 (4): 733- 746. DOI
	van Lange, P. A. M., Joireman, J., Parks, C. D., & van Dijk, E. The psychology of social dilemmas: A review. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2013, 120 (2): 125- 141. DOI
	Warneken, F., & Tomasello, M. Varieties of altruism in children and chimpanzees. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2009, 13 (9): 397- 402. DOI
	West, S. A., Cooper, G. A., Ghoul, M. B., & Griffin, A. S. Ten recent insights for our understanding of cooperation. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 2021, 5 (4): 419- 430. DOI
	Yamagishi, T., Matsumoto, Y., Kiyonari, T., Takagishi, H., Li, Y., Kanai, R., & Sakagami, M. Response time in economic games reflects different types of decision conflict for prosocial and proself individuals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2017, 114 (24): 6394- 6399. DOI
	Yamagishi, T., Takagishi, H., de Souza Rodrigues Fermin, A., Kanai, R., Li, Y., & Matsumoto, Y. Cortical thickness of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex predicts strategic choices in economic games. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016, 113 (20): 5582- 5587. DOI
	Zaki, J., & Mitchell, J. P. Intuitive prosociality. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2013, 22 (6): 466- 470. DOI

时间压力	社会价值取向	最大差异困境		斗鸡困境		信任困境		囚徒困境
时间压力	社会价值取向	收益	损失	收益	损失	收益	损失	收益	损失
无时间压力	亲社会	0.90±0.21	0.91±0.18	0.77±0.28	0.73±0.29	0.72±0.29	0.76±0.30	0.48±0.32	0.46±0.38
无时间压力	亲自我	0.87±0.25	0.85±0.28	0.70±0.31	0.63±0.34	0.47±0.39	0.53±0.27	0.29±0.27	0.17±0.23
有时间压力	亲社会	0.91±0.22	0.91±0.19	0.78±0.26	0.81±0.23	0.62±0.37	0.67±0.32	0.56±0.31	0.43±0.33
有时间压力	亲自我	0.79±0.33	0.69±0.36	0.60±0.30	0.49±0.37	0.68±0.34	0.41±0.26	0.45±0.31	0.42±0.36

时间压力	社会价值取向	最大差异困境		斗鸡困境		信任困境		囚徒困境
时间压力	社会价值取向	收益	损失	收益	损失	收益	损失	收益	损失
无时间压力	亲社会	0.90±0.21	0.91±0.18	0.77±0.28	0.73±0.29	0.72±0.29	0.76±0.30	0.48±0.32	0.46±0.38
无时间压力	亲自我	0.87±0.25	0.85±0.28	0.70±0.31	0.63±0.34	0.47±0.39	0.53±0.27	0.29±0.27	0.17±0.23
有时间压力	亲社会	0.91±0.22	0.91±0.19	0.78±0.26	0.81±0.23	0.62±0.37	0.67±0.32	0.56±0.31	0.43±0.33
有时间压力	亲自我	0.79±0.33	0.69±0.36	0.60±0.30	0.49±0.37	0.68±0.34	0.41±0.26	0.45±0.31	0.42±0.36

[1]	孙倩, 周俊, 刘永芳. 自我与他人社会价值取向对合作行为的影响及作用机制[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(6): 821-827.
[2]	王欣竹, 邹何辉, 郝娜, 黄瑶, 吴琴, 崔丽莹. 抑制还是补偿？尴尬情绪对初中生合作倾向和行为的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(4): 549-555.
[3]	邓颜彦, 郭成. 合作与竞争关系中社会比较对高中生认知信任与情感信任的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(4): 556-562.
[4]	陈衍, 江婷, 李玮, 陈取麟, 潘运, 胡思瑶. 合作中责任比较和分配评价差异的ERPs研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(2): 152-159.
[5]	郑文倩, 陈云云, 宋国萍, 徐敏, 白正月, 李兰洁. 亲社会视频游戏中的合作对博弈决策中合作行为的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(1): 85-91.
[6]	凌晓丽, 孙鹏. 损失情境下社会困境中的合作行为[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(3): 377-383.
[7]	侯钰莹, 陈世平, 孟四清. 收益和损失情境中D-E冲突的反射效应和习得速度[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(2): 268-273.
[8]	周详, 张泽宇, 曾晖. 长期合作学习小组中的集体智慧及其影响因素研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2018, 16(2): 231-237.
[9]	崔丽莹,黄晓娇,陈晓梅. 组间竞争对小学生合作绩效及言语互动策略的影响^*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2016, 14(6): 788-794.
[10]	魏华,周宗奎,田媛,丁倩,熊婕. 网络游戏成瘾：竞争、合作体验与沉醉感的影响^*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2016, 14(2): 264-269.
[11]	张振,张帆,原胜,郭丰波,王益文. 社会价值取向滑块测验中文版的测量学分析^*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2015, 13(3): 404-409.
[12]	王娜. 中国人人格特质结构对合作的影响机制[J]. , 2012, 10(2): 92-97.
[13]	张丽玲；白学军. 合作游戏训练对学前儿童合作行为的影响[J]. , 2010, 8(3): 218-222.
[14]	王静,陈英和. 大学生合作学习的问题解决过程及其对问题解决水平的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2009, 7(4): 258-264.
[15]	王沛；汲慧丽. directed forgetting\|retrieval-induced forgetting\|retrieval practice.[J]. , 2009, 7(2): 93-97.