Please wait a minute...
心理学报
  论文 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
愤怒和悲伤情绪对助人决策的影响:人际责任归因的作用
杨昭宁1,3; 顾子贝2; 王杜娟3; 谭旭运4; 王晓明3
(1济南大学教育与心理科学学院, 济南 250022) (2北京师范大学心理学院, 应用实验心理北京市重点实验室, 北京 100875) (3曲阜师范大学教育科学学院, 曲阜 273165) (4中国社会科学院社会学研究所, 北京 100732)
The effect of anger and sadness on prosocial decision making: The role of the interpersonal attribution of responsibility
YANG Zhaoning1,3; GU Zibei2; WANG Dujuan3; TAN Xuyun4; WANG Xiaoming3
(1 School of Education and Psychology, University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, China) (2 School of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing Key Lab of Applied Experimental Psychology, Beijing 100875, China) (3 School of Education Science, Qufu Normal University, Qufu 273165, China) (4 Institute of Sociology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing 100732, China)
全文: PDF(417 KB)   评审附件 (1 KB) 
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 

基于具体情绪理论——评价倾向框架理论(ATF), 采用两项研究考察负性情绪愤怒和悲伤对助人决策的影响, 并探究人际责任归因在这一关系中的作用。两项研究均采用自传体情绪记忆任务诱发情绪, 研究一中自变量情绪为组间变量, 包括愤怒、悲伤和中性三个水平, 因变量助人决策操作为为他人花费时间; 研究二中自变量1为组间变量情绪, 包括愤怒和悲伤, 自变量2为组内变量人际责任归因, 操作为模糊归因、不可控的情景归因、可控的自我归因三种情境, 因变量助人决策操作为为他人花费金钱。结果发现:(1)与愤怒情绪相比, 悲伤情绪下个体为他人花费的时间和捐助的金钱更多; (2)在模糊的人际责任归因条件下, 悲伤个体会比愤怒个体捐助更多的钱。研究表明:同为负性情绪的愤怒和悲伤在助人决策上的作用不同, 悲伤个体比愤怒个体做出更多的助人决策; 人际责任性归因会影响附带情绪和助人决策的关系。研究结论有助于理解附带情绪对助人决策的影响, 进一步丰富并延伸ATF理论的证据和领域, 对发挥情境中人际责任归因在助人决策中的作用具有一定的现实意义。

服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
杨昭宁
顾子贝
王杜娟
谭旭运
王晓明
关键词 愤怒 悲伤 助人决策 人际责任归因 附带情绪    
Abstract

Previous research suggested that emotions have an effect on prosocial decision making depending on the dimensions of emotional valence, little research has verified the role of specific emotions of the same valence. Drawing on the Appraisal-Tendency Framework (ATF), the present set of studies aimed to explore the carryover effect of two incidentally negative emotions, i.e. anger and sadness, on prosocial decision making and the role of the interpersonal attribution of responsibility in this effect. We conducted two studies, where emotions were induced via the Autobiographical Emotional Memory Task (AEMT). Study 1 investigated the effects of anger and sadness on prosocial decision making with a between-subjects design. Participants were randomly assigned to angry, sad, or neutral conditions and were asked to indicate how much time they were willing to spend helping others. Study 2 explored whether the effects of anger and sadness on prosocial decision making depend on interpersonal attribution of responsibility. This study employed a 2 (emotions: anger/ sadness) × 3 (interpersonal attribution of responsibility: ambiguity/ uncontrollable and external situation/ controllable situation and recipient own) mixed design with emotions as a between-subjects variable. Participants were randomly assigned to angry or sad conditions. Similar to study 1, emotions were induced through AEMT. Interpersonal attribution of responsibility was manipulated by varying the information about the person who needs help. In the ambiguity condition, the reason that the person needs help is not clear; in the uncontrollable and external situation condition, the reason that the person needs help is due to uncontrollable external situation; in the controllable situation and recipient own condition, the person who is in need of help is responsible for such circumstance. Prosocial decision making was measured by the amount of money participants were willing to donate. Across two studies we found that: (1) Participants in the sad condition were willing to spend more time and donate more money to others than their counterparts in the angry and neutral conditions. (2) Under the condition of ambiguous attribution of responsibility, participants who experienced sadness were more willing to help others compared to those in angry condition; in the uncontrollable and external situation conditions, and controllable situation and recipient own conditions, anger and sadness had similar effects on helping behavior. (3) In the sad condition, compared to ambiguous attribution of responsibility, participants were more willing to help when the responsibility was attributed to uncontrollable and external situation, whereas participants were less willing to help when the responsibility was attributed to the person who needs help. In the angry condition, participants were more willing to help when the responsibility was attributed to uncontrollable and external situation rather than when it was ambiguous or when the recipients were blamed. We conclude that (a) Incidental emotions of the same valence have different effects of carrying over on prosocial decision making- sadness facilitates helping behavior while anger impedes prosocial decision making, and (b) Interpersonal attribution of responsibility contributes to such effect. Anger and sadness have opposing effects on prosocial decision making only when the interpersonal attribution of responsibility remains ambiguous. These findings have important implications for understanding the mechanism underlying the impacts of different incidental emotions of the same valence on prosocial decision making.

Key wordsanger    sadness    prosocial decision making    interpersonal attribution of responsibility    incidental emotions
收稿日期: 2016-07-26      出版日期: 2017-03-25
通讯作者: 杨昭宁, E-mail: sep_yangzn@ujn.edu.cn   
引用本文:   
杨昭宁;顾子贝;王杜娟;谭旭运;王晓明. 愤怒和悲伤情绪对助人决策的影响:人际责任归因的作用[J]. 心理学报, 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.00393.
YANG Zhaoning; GU Zibei; WANG Dujuan; TAN Xuyun; WANG Xiaoming. The effect of anger and sadness on prosocial decision making: The role of the interpersonal attribution of responsibility. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(3): 393-403.
链接本文:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.00393      或      http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/Y2017/V49/I3/393
[1] 殷融;张菲菲;王元元;臧日霞. 当抗议遭遇挫折:集体行动失利情境下情绪反应对行动意愿的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(4): 482-499.
[2] 陈晓;高辛;周晖. 宽宏大量与睚眦必报:宽恕和报复对愤怒的降低作用[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(2): 241-252.
[3] 陈颖媛;邹智敏;潘俊豪. 资质过剩感影响组织公民行为的情绪路径[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(1): 72-82.
[4] 闫志英;卢家楣. 情境真实性对悲伤移情调节的ERP证据[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(8): 971-980.
[5] 张书维. 群际威胁与集群行为意向:群体性事件的双路径模型[J]. 心理学报, 2013, 45(12): 1410-1430 .
[6] 郑希付. 不同情绪模式的词语和图片刺激启动的时间效应[J]. , 2004, 36(05): 545-549.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《心理学报》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn