Please wait a minute...
心理学报  2017, Vol. 49 Issue (9): 1206-1218    DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.01206
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
 我会在谁面前舍弃利益? ——博弈对象的能力与社会距离对名利 博弈倾向的影响
谈晨皓1;  王 沛1;  崔诣晨1,2
 (1上海师范大学教育学院心理系, 上海 200234) (2南京林业大学思想政治理论教学研究部, 南京 210037)
 Should I sacrifice my profit before his eyes? Partner’s ability and social distance affecting the tendency of reputation-profit game
TAN Chenhao1;  WANG Pei1; CUI Yichen1,2
 (1 Department of Psychology, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China) (2 Institute of Ideological and Political Education, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China)
全文: PDF(614 KB)   评审附件 (1 KB) 
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)       背景资料
文章导读  
摘要  通过构造虚拟的捐献情境及贸易情境, 结合博弈任务, 以大学生为被试探讨了名利博弈对象的能力和社会距离对名利博弈中博弈者的博弈行为倾向的影响。结果表明, 在捐献情境下, 被试在高能力的名利博弈对象面前比在低能力的名利博弈对象面前更倾向于做出接近自己半数报酬的捐献行为, 牺牲利益以获取好名声。在贸易情境下存在名利博弈对象的能力与社会距离的交互作用, 被试仅在面对低能力的名利博弈对象时会考虑社会距离因素, 在社会距离近的名利博弈对象面前比在社会距离远的名利博弈对象面前提出更低的售价, 牺牲自己的利益以获得好名声。研究结果初步证实名利博弈对象能力与社会距离对名利博弈具有重要影响以及个体在名利博弈中具有策略性。
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
谈晨皓
王沛
崔诣晨
关键词  名利博弈 能力 社会距离 社会身份    
Abstract: Previous studies have shown that when individuals must make a choice between reputation and profit (reputation-profit game), individuals usually tend to get a reputation from the sacrifice of profit. According to competitive altruism theory, the reason why people cooperate to get a reputation at the cost of profit is to compete against others to get some valuable opportunities in the future with the help of the reputation. Based on this perspective, ability and social distance of the game partner (only receives information about reputation) which decide the upper limit of profit and the belief of whether the partner would afford such a chance would affect the tendency of reputation-profit game. To demonstrate these two factors and reveal the nature of reputation obtaining behavior, in this research, we hypothesized that ability and social distance of the partner would affect the preference between reputation and profit, when faced with a partner whose ability is strong or social distance is close, individual would prefer reputation than profit, and there would be an interaction between ability and social distance. A condition about contribution was set up in Experiment 1. 40 undergraduate students participated in this experiment. They were told that they would attend in an online activity. First, participants took part in a series of dummy prisoner dilemma game and won some money (100 tokens). Second, they were told that they would play a game (trust game) with another student in the future, and the importance of reputation was introduced (all participants were trustee). After that, participants were told that there were some public accounts which need their contribution, and they could make virtual contribution to each account and only one would be chosen as the real. Before the contribution, they were told that the contribution would be seen by a student who would be the trustee. Ability (truster’s principal: high/low) and social distance (schoolmate/students from other schools) were manipulated as independent variables, and contribution was used as dependent variable. A condition about bargain was set up in Experiment 2. 55 undergraduate students participated in this experiment. The background was just like experiment 1. First, participants were told that they will perform as suppliers in an online task whose task was pricing the materials they sold. They were told their profit would be calculated respectively in each zone, and only one would be selected as the final result. Second, participants were told if the price they set was higher than the “real value”, there would be 50% chance of being confiscated half of earnings in this turn. Then they were learned that there would be two times of bargain in each zone, and buyers would chat about each supplier soon after the first bargain. Before the pricing tasks, participants were informed that the number of suppliers was greater than the number of players in each zone; each player had the right to choose a supplier to buy material in the second bargain. Ability (player’s demand: high/low/none) and social distance (schoolmate/ students from other schools) were manipulated as independent variables, and participant’s pricing result was used as dependent variable. The results of Experiment 1 showed that participants donated more money when his donation was seen by a student whose ability was high. This finding demonstrated that the higher the ability is the more reputation individual wants. And the results of Experiment 2 showed that there was an interaction between ability and social distance. Only when partner’s ability of the future mission was low, participants preferred to propose a lower price before the partner whose social distance is close in order to gain reputation from the sacrifice of profit. This finding showed only when ability is low, then individuals would take social distance into account, and they tend to acquire a good reputation before a partner whose social distance is close. All the findings supported our hypothesis that ability and social distance are the core factors which affect the tendency of reputation-profit game. These results verified the tactical of individual’s choice in reputation- profit game.
Key words reputation-profit game    ability    social distance    social identity
收稿日期: 2014-03-27      出版日期: 2017-07-16
ZTFLH:     
  B849:C91  
基金资助: 2012年国家社科基金重点项目“中国人自我与人际认知的特征:心理与脑科学的整合研究” (12AZD117)资助。
通讯作者: 王沛, E-mail: wangpei1970@163.com     E-mail: E-mail: wangpei1970@163.com
引用本文:   
谈晨皓, 王沛, 崔诣晨.  我会在谁面前舍弃利益? ——博弈对象的能力与社会距离对名利 博弈倾向的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(9): 1206-1218.
WANG Pei, TAN Chenhao, CUI Yichen.  Should I sacrifice my profit before his eyes? Partner’s ability and social distance affecting the tendency of reputation-profit game. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(9): 1206-1218.
链接本文:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.01206      或      http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/Y2017/V49/I9/1206
[1] 王燕, 侯博文, 李歆瑶, 李晓煦, 焦璐.  不同性别比和资源获取能力 对未婚男性择偶标准的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(9): 1195-1205.
[2] 刘湍丽, 白学军.  部分线索对记忆提取的影响:认知抑制能力的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(9): 1158-1171.
[3] 何贵兵, 杨鑫蔚, 蒋多.  环境损益的社会折扣:利他人格的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(10): 1334-1343.
[4] 康春花; 任平; 曾平飞. 多级评分聚类诊断法的影响因素[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(7): 891-902.
[5] 范伟; 钟毅平; 李慧云; 孟楚熠; 游畅; 傅小兰. 欺骗判断与欺骗行为中自我控制的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(7): 845-856.
[6] 温红博;梁凯丽;刘先伟. 家庭环境对中学生阅读能力的影响:阅读投入、阅读兴趣的中介作用[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(3): 248-257.
[7] 徐富明;蒋多;张慧;李欧;孔诗晓; 史燕伟. 心理距离对基线比例忽略的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(10): 1292-1301.
[8] 江红艳;王海忠;何云;朱力. 公司形象和产品属性超越的协同效应:基于刻板印象内容模型[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(1): 95-105.
[9] 晏碧华;游旭群. 相对到达时间任务中飞行员对客体特征与运动特征的分离[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(2): 212-223.
[10] 汪海彬;卢家楣;姚本先;桑青松;陈宁;唐晓晨. 职前教师情绪复杂性对情绪面孔加工的影响 ——来自行为、ERP和眼动的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(1): 50-65.
[11] 毛晓飞;彭华茂. 视知觉压力在基本心理能力老化中的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(1): 29-38.
[12] 于海波;郑晓明;许春燕;晏常丽. 大学生可就业能力与主客观就业绩效:线性与倒U型关系[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(6): 807-822.
[13] 马红宇;申传刚;杨璟;唐汉瑛;谢菊兰. 边界弹性与工作-家庭冲突、增益的关系:基于人?环境匹配的视角[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(4): 540-551.
[14] 辛自强;辛素飞. 被信任者社会身份复杂性对其可信性的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(3): 415-426.
[15] 张博;黎坚;徐楚;李一茗. 11~14岁超常儿童与普通儿童问题解决能力的发展比较[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(12): 1823-1834.
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