窦凯, 刘耀中, 王玉洁, 聂衍刚. (2018). “乐”于合作: 感知社会善念诱导合作行为的情绪机制. 心理学报, 50(1), 101–114 王婷, 赵梁佛, 杨金朋, 张丹丹, 雷震. (2024). 分配意图与上行间接互惠: 来自行为与ERP的证据. 心理学报, 56(12), 1788–1799 袁博, 刘怡畅, 库婷婷. (2024). 感知社会善念对青少年亲社会行为的影响. 心理科学, 47(5), 1153–1162 郑显亮. (2010). 大学生网络利他行为: 量表编制与多层线性分析(博士学位论文). 上海师范大学. 钟毅平, 牛娜娜, 范伟, 任梦梦, 李梅. (2023). 动作自主性与社会距离对主动控制感的影响: 来自行为与ERPs的证据. 心理学报, 55(12), 1932–1948 Baek, T. H., Bakpayev, M., Yoon, S., & Kim, S. (2022). Smiling AI agents: How anthropomorphism and broad smiles increase charitable giving. International Journal of Advertising, 41(5), 850–867 Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108(3), 624–652 Carlson, R. W., Aknin, L. B., & Liotti, M. (2016). When is giving an impulse? An ERP investigation of intuitive prosocial behavior. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 11(7), 1121–1129 Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 115(1), 74–101 Erreygers, S., Vandebosch, H., Vranjes, I., Baillien, E., & De Witte, H. (2018). Positive or negative spirals of online behavior? Exploring reciprocal associations between being the actor and the recipient of prosocial and antisocial behavior online. New Media & Society, 20(9), 3437–3456 Li, M., Li, J., Tan, M., Li, H., & Zhong, Y. P. (2021). Exposure to money modulates the processing of charitable donation: An event-related potentials study. Neuroscience Letters, 765, 136277 Manesi, Z., van Lange, P. A. M., van Doesum, N. J., & Pollet, T. V. (2019). What are the most powerful predictors of charitable giving to victims of typhoon Haiyan: Prosocial traits, socio-demographic variables, or eye cues. Personality and Individual Differences, 146, 217–225 Mull, I., Wyss, J., Moon, E., & Lee, S. E. (2015). An exploratory study of using 3D avatars as online salespeople: The effect of avatar type on credibility, homophily, attractiveness and intention to interact. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 19(2), 154–168 Nowak, K. L., & Rauh, C. (2005). The influence of the avatar on online perceptions of anthropomorphism, androgyny, credibility, homophily, and attraction. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(1), 153–178 Pelau, C., Dabija, D. C., & Ene, I. (2021). What makes an AI device human-like? The role of interaction quality, empathy and perceived psychological anthropomorphic characteristics in the acceptance of artificial intelligence in the service industry. Computers in Human Behavior, 122, 106855 Praetorius, A. S., & G?rlich, D. (2020). How avatars influence user behavior: A review on the Proteus effect in virtual environments and video games. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (pp. 1–9). Bugibba, Malta: ACM. Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 94–109). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. van Doesum, N. J., de Vries, R. E., Blokland, A. A. J., Hill, J. M., Kuhlman, D. M., Stivers, A. W., … van Lange, P. A. M. (2020). Social mindfulness: Prosocial the active way. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 15(2), 183–193 van Doesum, N. J., Murphy, R. O., Gallucci, M., Aharonov-Majar, E., Athenstaedt, U., Au, W. T., … van Lange, P. A. M. (2021). Social mindfulness and prosociality vary across the globe. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(35), e2023846118 van Doesum, N. J., van Lange, D. A. W., & van Lange, P. A. M. (2013). Social mindfulness: Skill and will to navigate the social world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(1), 86–103 van Lange, P. A., & van Doesum, N. J. (2015). Social mindfulness and social hostility. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3, 18–24 Verhoef, R. E. J., van Dijk, A., & De Castro, B. O. (2022). A dual-mode social-information-processing model to explain individual differences in children’s aggressive behavior. Clinical Psychological Science, 10(1), 41–57 Xiao, F. Q., Zheng, Z. W., Wang, Y., Cui, J. F., & Chen, Y. H. (2015). Conflict monitoring and stimulus categorization processes involved in the prosocial attitude implicit association test: Evidence from event-related potentials. Social Neuroscience, 10(4), 408–417 Yamagishi, T., Jin, N., & Kiyonari, T. (1999). Bounded generalized reciprocity: Ingroup boasting and ingroup favoritism. Advances in Group Processes, 16, 161–197 Ye, Y. C., Jiang, P. T., & Zhang, W. K. (2022). The neural and psychological processes of peer-influenced online donation decision: An event-related potential study. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 899233 Zhang, Q. Q., Li, W. X., Zhang, M. N., Zhao, K., Liu, R. N., & Ma, C. (2024). Internet altruistic behavior among Chinese early adolescents: Exploring differences in gender and collective efficacy using a latent growth modeling. Current Psychology, 43, 5007–5019
|