Intuition or deliberation? Decision making strategies in prosocial behavior and perceptions of humanness

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.01225

Abstract

WANG Jingyan, ZHANG Hong. (2024). Intuition or deliberation? Decision making strategies in prosocial behavior and perceptions of humanness. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 56(9), 1225-1238.

Figures/Tables 8

Table 1 Descriptive statistics of humanness perceptions by experimental condition, Study 1

Humanness	Intuitive		Deliberative
	(N = 90)		(N = 86)
	M	SD	M	SD
Human Nature	5.90	0.89	5.10	1.07
Human Uniqueness	4.87	0.88	5.01	0.91

Figure 1. Humanness perceptions as a function of decision strategy (under highly emotional situation), Study 1.
Note. ns, non-significant; ^*** p < 0.001.

Table 2 Descriptive statistics of humanness perceptions by experimental condition, Study 2

Humanness	High emotional (N = 206)				Low emotional (N = 198)
	Intuitive (N = 101)		Deliberative (N = 105)		Intuitive (N = 99)		Deliberative (N = 99)
	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD
Human Nature	5.90	0.63	5.69	0.84	5.26	0.88	5.51	0.74
Human Uniqueness	5.26	0.89	5.48	0.83	4.56	1.01	5.16	0.97

Figure 2. Humanness perceptions as a function of decision strategy and situational emotionality, Study 2.
Note. ns, non-significant; ^*p < 0.05, ^*** p < 0.001.

Table 3 Descriptive statistics of humanness perceptions by experimental condition, Study 3

Humanness	High emotional (N = 228)				Low emotional (N = 236)
	Intuitive (N = 113)		Deliberative (N = 115)		Intuitive (N = 121)		Deliberative (N = 115)
	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD
Human Nature	5.99	0.61	5.72	0.86	5.77	0.84	5.84	0.86
Human Uniqueness	5.62	0.78	5.63	0.85	5.24	1.06	5.65	0.85

Figure 3. Humanness perceptions as a function of decision strategy and situational emotionality, Study 3.
Note. ns, non-significant; ^*p < 0.05, ^*** p < 0.001.

Table 4 Descriptive statistics of humanness perceptions by experimental condition, Study 4

Humanness	Positive consequences (N = 204)				Control (N = 196)				Negative consequences (N = 213)
	Intuitive (N = 100)		Deliberative (N = 104)		Intuitive (N = 102)		Deliberative (N = 94)		Intuitive (N = 108)		Deliberative (N = 105)
	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD
Human Nature	5.45	0.97	5.59	1.02	5.06	0.94	5.50	0.90	4.77	0.93	4.91	1.10
Human Uniqueness	5.04	1.12	5.20	1.01	4.47	1.12	5.23	0.95	4.00	0.99	4.37	1.11

Figure 4. Humanness perceptions as a function of decision strategy and behavioral consequences (under low emotional condition), Study 4.
Note. ns, non-significant; ^**p < 0.01, ^*** p < 0.001; Error bars represent ± 1 SE.

[1]	WANG Tianhong, JIN Shan, CHENG Zipeng, LOU Yu, XIE Xiaofei. The prediction bias of conspicuous altruism: Helpers underestimate social evaluations from bystanders [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2024, 56(9): 1210-1224.
[2]	LIN Jing, XU Boya, YANG Ying, ZHANG Qing-peng, KOU Yu. Network analysis and core dimensions of adolescent prosocial behavior [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2024, 56(9): 1252-1265.
[3]	LIU Qianwen, WANG Zhenhong. The interactive effects of parent-child relationship, sensory processing sensitivity, and the COMT Val158Met polymorphism on preschoolers’ prosocial behaviors [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2023, 55(5): 711-725.
[4]	DUAN Wenting, SUN Qiwu, WANG Ming, WU Caizhi, CHEN Zhenzhen. The developmental cascades of prosocial behavior tendency, internalizing and externalizing problems for early adolescence in China: A within-person analysis [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2022, 54(7): 813-827.
[5]	LIU WenXing, ZHU YangHao, BAI Yang, WANG HaiJiang, HAN Yi. Indulge in self-admiration or offer help to others? The influence of employee narcissism on prosocial behavior [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2022, 54(3): 300-312.
[6]	ZHANG Wenxin, LI Xi, CHEN Guanghui, CAO Yanmiao. The relationship between positive parenting and adolescent prosocial behavior: The mediating role of empathy and the moderating role of the oxytocin receptor gene [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2021, 53(9): 976-991.
[7]	Wenchao WANG, Xinchun WU. Mediating roles of gratitude, social support and posttraumatic growth in the relation between empathy and prosocial behavior among adolescents after the Ya’an earthquake [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2020, 52(3): 307-316.
[8]	YAO Qi, WU Zhangjian, ZHANG Changqing, FU Guoqun. Effect of power on conspicuous prosocial behavior [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2020, 52(12): 1421-1435.
[9]	WANG Jianfeng, DAI Bing. The pursuit of fame at the expense of profit: The influence of power motive and social presence on prosocial behavior [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2020, 52(1): 55-65.
[10]	WANG Yanhui; LI Dongping; SUN Wenqiang; ZHAO Liyan; LAI Xuefen; ZHOU Yueyue. Parent-child attachment and prosocial behavior among junior high school students: Moderated mediation effect [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(5): 663-679.
[11]	DING Ruyi, ZHOU Hui, ZHANG Bao, CHEN Xiao. Narcissism and adolescents’ prosocial behaviors: The role of public and private situations [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2016, 48(8): 981-988.
[12]	WANG Dong; CHEN Zuosong. Relationship between moral disengagement in sport and prosocial and antisocial behaviors in Chinese athletes [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2016, 48(3): 305-317.
[13]	ZHENG Xiaoying; PENG Siqing; PENG Luluo. Feeling Better and Becoming MoreBenevolent: Impact of Social Comparison on ProsocialBehavior [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2015, 47(2): 243-250.
[14]	LI Hong;GAO Yang. Escape Decision-Making under Real Fire and Simulated Fire Conditions [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2013, 45(9): 993-1003.
[15]	LI Hong;CHEN Shi;NI Shiguang. Escape Decision-Making Based on Intuition and Deliberation under Simple and Complex Judgment and Decision Conditions [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2013, 45(1): 94-103.