ISSN 1671-3710
CN 11-4766/R
主办:中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

• •    

前瞻性情绪作为社会风险信息源假说:公共场景下风险决策的情绪及文化机制探讨

王晓田1,王娜2,何金波1   

  1. 1. 香港中文大学(深圳)
    2. 韩山师范学院
  • 收稿日期:2020-09-08 修回日期:2020-11-27 出版日期:2020-12-15 发布日期:2020-12-15
  • 通讯作者: 王晓田
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金

The Hypothesis of Anticipatory Emotions as Information for Social Risks: Examining Emotional and Cultural Mechanisms of Risky Decisions in Public

X.T. (XiaoTian) Wang 1, 2, 1   

  1. 1. Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen)
    2.
  • Received:2020-09-08 Revised:2020-11-27 Online:2020-12-15 Published:2020-12-15
  • Contact: X.T. (XiaoTian) Wang
  • Supported by:
    National Natural Science Foundation of China

摘要: 本研究从梳理决策的情绪理论入手,在综合几种主要理论的基础上提出了“前瞻性情绪作为社会风险信息源”的假说。前瞻性情绪是产生在决策过程中的,由于对决策选择的预期而感受到的,进而影响决策行为的情绪。社会环境下的风险事件具有突发和稍纵即逝的特征,如果一个公民对这类风险事件做出反应,其结果的概率难于量化。在这种情况下,前瞻性情绪能够为决策者快速提供有关信息,并形成对决策预期结果严重性和可能性的综合表征,从而成为公众场景下风险决策的有效线索。不同的前瞻性情绪的组合在面对社会性风险事件时具有针对性的作用。近年来在文化比较中对于面子、荣誉、和尊严文化的划分,也为我们研究文化的情绪特征和行为效应提供了理论框架。我们通过四项研究和多个实验探讨前瞻性情绪如何影响公众场景下人们的风险应对行为,并对三种文化的情绪特征进行比较,探索情绪性决策中个人因素、群体因素、及文化因素如何共同决定公共场景下风险决策(如亲社会行为或反社会行为)的发生与发展。同时也期望为公共政策的制定及风险管理提供科学依据。

关键词: 前瞻性情绪, 风险决策, 风险管理, 公共事件, 社会规范, 文化差异

Abstract: This research project explores the emotional mechanisms underlying prosocial and antisocial behaviors in public arenas. We take an empirical approach to studying how anticipatory emotions affect risky decision-making. The studies focus on social norm-violating behaviors and the reactions to these social violations. We first synthesize several influential theories in the literature concerning the roles of emotion in decision-making and developed a hypothesis of anticipatory emotions as an information source for social risks. We define anticipatory emotions as any discrete emotions that are induced from the expected choice options and felt at the time of decision-making, and in turn, regulate the decision behavior. We view anticipatory emotions as mental representations of social risks. We predict that as an essential part of emotional intelligence, anticipatory emotions help decision agents to make use of emotions for assessing expected choice outcomes when making risky decisions in public. Social risks, particularly those posed by antisocial behaviors in public, are characterized by their destructive, emergent, transient, and unpredictable nature. The reactions to these antisocial behaviors need to be quick and unambiguous. However, the probabilities of possible consequences associated with these reactions are usually hard to reckon. Under such conditions, anticipatory emotions provide a and overall risk assessment as a substitute for expected utility, reflecting both the likelihood and severity of expected choice outcomes. Decision rules based on anticipatory emotions are easy to follow. If a person feels excited when anticipating possible outcomes of a prosocial or antisocial action, the person is likely to take the action. In contrast, if one experiences fear when expecting a prosocial or antisocial action, the person is likely to avoid the action. This hypothesis also predicts that anticipatory emotions collectively distinguish different types of social risks. Furthermore, the profile of anticipatory emotions is culturally specific. The more recent categorization of the face, dignity, and honor cultures allows us to make predictions about the emotional characteristics of each culture. As far as we know, little is known about how different combinations of anticipatory emotions determine risky social decision-making in public events. The proposed research project consists of four parts with multiple experiments. Collectively, the proposed studies will examine how anticipatory emotions influence reactions to public risks. Secondly, we explore how dispositional, social, and cultural factors regulate prosocial and antisocial behaviors. The results of these studies will benefit the research in risk management, public policymaking, and provide scientific support to public education, counseling, and civil service training.

Key words: Anticipatory emotions, Risky decision, Risk management, Public events, Social norms, Cultural differences