社会距离和性别对公平关注的影响

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本研究使用单次匿名最后通牒博弈任务，采用2（性别: 男性, 女性）×3（社会距离: 自我决策, 替朋友决策, 替他人决策）×5（提议类型: 1/9, 2/8, 3/7, 4/6, 5/5）的混合实验设计，通过操作反应者的不同社会距离，考察资产分配情境下自我-他人决策的性别差异。研究结果发现：（1）相比于自我决策和替朋友决策，女性被试替他人决策时更愿意接受提议1/9，2/8和3/7，而提议4/6和5/5的接受率不受社会距离的影响；男性被试中社会距离和提议类型的交互作用不显著；（2）不平等提议的反应时随社会距离增加而逐渐降低，而平等提议的反应时不受社会距离的调节；（3）替他人决策时女性的接受阈限显著低于男性，而自我决策及替朋友决策时接受阈限不存在性别差异。

关键词: 社会距离, 性别差异, 最后通牒博弈

Abstract: The present study explored whether social distance and gender of recipients could influence their fairness consideration during a one-shot anonymous Ultimatum Game (UG). The experimental design was a 2×3×5 mixed factorial design, comprising the between-subject factors (gender: female, male) and the within-subject factors (social distance: self, friend, stranger) and offer type (1/9, 2/8, 3/7, 4/6, 5/5). Forty-two adults participated as recipients in the UG and made decisions for themselves, their friends and strangers. The results found that: 1) compared to deciding for themselves and friends, female participants accepted a more unfair offer (1/9, 2/8, 3/7) when deciding for strangers, and the interaction between social distance and offer type was not significant among male participants; 2) participants' reaction times of these unequal offers decreased as the social distance became more distant, while the equal offer's reaction times did not influence by social distance; 3) when deciding for strangers, female's acceptance threshold was lower than male's acceptance threshold, while the acceptance threshold had no significant gender differences when deciding for themselves or friends.

Key words: social distance, gender difference, ultimatum game

中图分类号:

B844.2

张振, 齐春辉, 付淑英, 王青春, 熊建萍. 社会距离和性别对公平关注的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(1): 100-106.

ZHANG Zhen, QI Chunhui, FU Shuying, WANG Qingchun, XIONG Jianping. Effects of Social Distance and Gender on Fairness Consideration[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(1): 100-106.

参考文献

刘翠翠, 陈彬, 刘磊鑫, 原献学, 汪祚军. (2013). 当局者迷, 旁观者清? 自我-他人决策的理性差异及其机制. 心理科学进展, 21(5), 879-885
刘耀中, 刘敏, 彭滨. (2018). 任务框架和社会距离对风险决策的影响: 来自ERP的证据. 心理与行为研究, 16(1), 13-21
刘永芳, 王鹏, 庄锦英, 钟俊, 孙庆洲, 刘毅. (2014). 自我-他人决策差异: 问题、研究与思考. 心理科学进展, 22(4), 580-587
张振, 刘凯, 杨邵峰. (2013). 非理性决策中的情绪加工及其影响因素—以最后通牒任务为例. 唐山师范学院学报, 35(1), 155-158
张振, 杨邵峰, 李颖. (2014). 关于非理性决策的建构水平理论评述—以最后通牒任务为例. 成都师范学院学报, 30(7), 64-67, doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5642.2014.07.064
Campbell, A. (2013). The evolutionary psychology of women's aggression. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 368(1631), 20130078, doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0078.
Chuah, S. H., Hoffmann, R., Jones, M., & Williams, G. (2007). Do cultures clash? Evidence from cross-national ultimatum game experiments. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 64(1), 35-48.
Civai, C. (2013). Rejecting unfairness: Emotion-driven reaction or cognitive heuristic? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 126.
Civai, C., Corradi-Dell’Acqua, C., Gamer, M., & Rumiati, R. I. (2010). Are irrational reactions to unfairness truly emotionally-driven? Dissociated behavioural and emotional responses in the Ultimatum Game task. Cognition, 114(1), 89-95, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.09.001.
Croson, R., & Gneezy, U. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(2), 448-474, doi: 10.1257/jel.47.2.448.
Eagly, A. H. (2009). The his and hers of prosocial behavior: An examination of the social psychology of gender. American Psychologist, 64(8), 644-658, doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.64.8.644.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2011). Social role theory. In A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories in social psychology (pp. 458-476). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.
Eckel, C., De Oliveira, A. C. M., & Grossman, P. J. (2008). Gender and negotiation in the small: Are women (perceived to be) more cooperative than men? Negotiation Journal, 24(4), 429-445, doi: 10.1111/j.1571-9979.2008.00196.x.
Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (2001). Chivalry and solidarity in ultimatum games. Economic Inquiry, 39(2), 171-188, doi: 10.1111/j.1465-7295.2001.tb00059.x.
Falk, A., & Fischbacher, U. (2006). A theory of reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 54(2), 293-315, doi: 10.1016/j.geb.2005.03.001.
Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(3), 817-868, doi: 10.1162/003355399556151.
Flinkenflogel, N., Novin, S., Huizinga, M., & Krabbendam, L. (2017). Gender moderates the influence of self-construal priming on fairness considerations. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 503, doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00503.
Giacomantonio, M., De Dreu, C. K. W., Shalvi, S., Sligte, D., & Leder, S. (2010). Psychological distance boosts value-behavior correspondence in ultimatum bargaining and integrative negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(5), 824-829, doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.001.
Güth, W., & Kocher, M. G. (2014). More than thirty years of ultimatum bargaining experiments: Motives, variations, and a survey of the recent literature. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 108, 396-409.
Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 3(4), 367-388.
Kim, H., Schnall, S., Yi, D. J., & White, M. P. (2013). Social distance decreases responders’ sensitivity to fairness in the ultimatum game. Judgment and Decision Making, 8(5), 632-638.
McAuliffe, K., Blake, P. R., Steinbeis, N., & Warneken, F. (2017). The developmental foundations of human fairness. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(2), 0042, doi: 10.1038/s41562-016-0042.
Miller, L., & Ubeda, P. (2012). Are women more sensitive to the decision-making context? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 83(1), 98-104.
Oosterbeek, H., Sloof, R., & Van De Kuilen, G. (2004). Cultural differences in ultimatum game experiments: Evidence from a meta-analysis. Experimental Economics, 7(2), 171-188, doi: 10.1023/B:EXEC.0000026978.14316.74.
Solnick, S. J. (2001). Gender differences in the ultimatum game. Economic Inquiry, 39(2), 189-200, doi: 10.1111/j.1465-7295.2001.tb00060.x.
Straub, P. G., & Murnighan, J. K. (1995). An experimental investigation of ultimatum games: Information, fairness, expectations, and lowest acceptable offers. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 27(3), 345-364.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440-463, doi: 10.1037/a0018963.
Wallace, B., Cesarini, D., Lichtenstein, P., & Johannesson, M. (2007). Heritability of ultimatum game responder behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(40), 15631-15634, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0706642104.
Wang, C. S., Sivanathan, N., Narayanan, J., Ganegoda, D. B., Bauer, M., Bodenhausen, G. V., & Murnighan, K. (2011). Retribution and emotional regulation: The effects of time delay in angry economic interactions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(1), 46-54, doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.05.007.
Wang, Y. W., Zhang, Z., Bai, L. Y., Lin, C. D., Osinsky, R., & Hewig, J. (2017). Ingroup/outgroup membership modulates fairness consideration: Neural signatures from ERPs and EEG oscillations. Scientific Reports, 7, 39827, doi: 10.1038/srep39827.
Wening, S., Keith, N., & Abele, A. E. (2015). High construal level can help negotiators to reach integrative agreements: The role of information exchange and judgement accuracy. British Journal of Social Psychology, 55(2), 206-226.
Xiao, E. T., & Houser, D. (2005). Emotion expression in human punishment behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(20), 7398-7401, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0502399102.
Yudkin, D. A., Rothmund, T., Twardawski, M., Thalla, N., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2016). Reflexive intergroup bias in third-party punishment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(11), 1448-1459, doi: 10.1037/xge0000190.
Zheng, Y., Yang, Z., Jin, C. L., Qi, Y., & Liu, X. (2017). The influence of emotion on fairness-related decision making: A critical review of theories and evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1592, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01592.

[1]	岳鹏飞, 胡文丽, 张嘉鑫, 史梦梦. 粗暴养育与中学生学习投入：状态焦虑与性别的作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(2): 226-232.
[2]	侯娟, 郑心怡, 王秀, 方晓义. 金钱与时间感受启动对择偶标准的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(6): 838-844.
[3]	郭庆童, 徐铭雪, 许春艳, 刘秀丽. 大学生宿舍人际关系困扰与手机成瘾的关系：序列中介模型及性别差异[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(5): 650-656.
[4]	赵悦彤, 孙晓娟, 白倩, 张向葵. 空间活动问卷的修订及信效度检验[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(3): 289-296.
[5]	魏淑华, 赵健, 董及美, 陈功香. 工作对家庭的增益与中小学教师的工作满意度：职业认同的中介作用及其性别差异[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(1): 125-130,136.
[6]	齐春辉, 张振. 诚实-谦逊性和人际亲密性对公平规范执行的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(3): 419-425.
[7]	杨邵峰, 齐春辉, 张志超, 张振. 价值取向对自我他人决策时公平规范执行的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2018, 16(6): 834-840.
[8]	解晓娜, 李小平. 主观社会阶层对亲社会行为的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2018, 16(4): 563-569.
[9]	刘耀中, 刘敏, 彭滨. 任务框架和社会距离对风险决策的影响：来自ERP的证据[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2018, 16(1): 13-21.
[10]	陈晓燕, 莫秀锋, 张玲玲. 同伴接纳对儿童公平分配行为的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2017, 15(6): 774-780.
[11]	王珍珍,蒋文明. 公平加工的情境依赖性：来自行为的证据[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2016, 14(5): 600-604.
[12]	董圣鸿,郑海林,王燕,余巧玲. 4-6岁儿童公平意图的发展研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2016, 14(3): 325-330.
[13]	李甜甜, 吕勇. 面部表情觉知阈限的测量及其年龄和性别差异[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2015, 13(6): 771-777.
[14]	王芹, 白学军, 李士一. 情绪背景和社会预期对社会经济决策行为的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2015, 13(2): 191-197.
[15]	兰晓芳,张锦坤. 负面评价恐惧的性别差异：基于内隐和外显测量的比较[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2015, 13(1): 25-30.