Please wait a minute...
心理学报  2020, Vol. 52 Issue (1): 55-65    DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00055
  研究报告 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
“追名弃利”:权力动机与社会存在对亲社会行为的影响
王建峰(),戴冰()
四川应用心理学研究中心, 成都 610500
The pursuit of fame at the expense of profit: The influence of power motive and social presence on prosocial behavior
WANG Jianfeng(),DAI Bing()
Sichuan Research Center for Applied Psychology, Chengdu 610500, China
全文: PDF(557 KB)   HTML 评审附件 (1 KB) 
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)       背景资料
文章导读  
摘要 

目前关于权力动机的研究主要关注权力动机的阴暗面, 但是对权力动机的积极面尚不清楚。本研究从公平与合作行为的角度出发, 分别采用最后通牒博弈和公共物品博弈任务, 探讨不同权力动机水平个体在内隐(眼睛线索)或外显(他人在场)社会存在下的亲社会行为是否不同。结果发现, 在眼睛线索或他人在场条件下, 相对于低权力动机者, 高权力动机者表现出更高的公平与合作水平。然而当没有社会存在线索时, 高低权力动机者的亲社会行为没有显著差异。结果提示高权力动机者出于名誉和地位的策略考虑, 也会表现出积极的亲社会行为。

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
关键词 权力动机社会存在名誉公平合作亲社会行为    
Abstract

Power motive often aims at status and superiority and has been associated with antisocial decision-making, dehumanization of others, infidelity, and aggressive behaviors. In light of such findings, it is not surprising that the power motive has acquired a bad reputation. However, there is also a benevolent, prosocial side to power that has not received equal attention. From the beginning, researchers have emphasized the dual nature of power motive: people realize their power motive in either an antisocial or a prosocial direction. Although the stereotypical picture associated with power implicates a kind of offensively aggressive and imperious behavior, such behavior is unlikely to result in sustainable strategic condition beneficial to attaining and maintaining dominance, and cannot typically characterize individuals mainly driven by power motive. Instead of self-serving or egotistical actions, behavioral strategies in a socially preferable manner would advantage power motivated individuals to achieve the ultimate goal. On the contrary, egocentric behavioral strategies can impress other individuals with antisocial characters, such as imprudence and arbitrariness. 
Research has shown that social presence (e.g., a subtle cue of being watched) has a significant influence on individuals’ behavior in social dilemmas. Specifically, it has been observed that individuals’ tendency to engage in prosocial behavior increases when acting under conditions of a social presence. With respect to social presence, reputation has been discussed as a critical factor determining individuals’ tendency to contribute to a public good and to behave prosocially. The relevant argument holds that individuals are willing to invest private resources under conditions where they can expect to build a positive reputation that may be beneficial in (future) social interactions involving indirect reciprocity. For example, research has demonstrated the status benefits of selfless behavior. Individuals pursue status by enhancing the apparent value they provide to their group and compete for status not by bullying and intimidating others, but by behaving in ways that suggest high levels of competence, generosity, and commitment to the group. This seemingly selfless behavior leads to them being perceived as more generous in their groups and, in turn, leads to a higher status and a good reputation. Therefore, individuals who sought reputation and status attained them by acting strategically prosocially.
The present work builds on previous research on social presence and reputation and addresses the question of whether the effect of power motive on prosocial behavior is dependent on social presence. In essence, the current work put the assumption to the test that, under conditions where a subtle cue of being watched (study 1) or public situation (study 2) render reputational concerns salient, individuals are more likely to act in fairness (study 1) or cooperation (study 2) if they have a higher level of power motive. In contrast, under anonymous conditions, individuals’ power motive should not be related to fair and cooperative behaviors. The results confirmed our hypothesis that under conditions where a subtle cue of being watched or in a public situation, high power motive individuals, relative to low power motive participants, allocated more money to interactive partners in the ultimatum game and provided higher provision levels of public goods in the public good game. On the contrary, under anonymous conditions, no significant relationship was found between individuals’ power motive and fair and cooperative behaviors.
The results suggest that people with high power motive also exhibit prosocial behaviors in consideration of strategies of reputation and status. The present work demonstrates that power motive can play a critical role in social dilemma situations. Moreover, the findings emphasize that one must take the specificity of a situation into account (particularly, whether social presence as a situational factor influences individuals’ decisions) in order to explain individuals’ behavior in dilemma situations.

Key wordspower motive    social presence    reputation    fairness    cooperation    prosocial behavior
收稿日期: 2019-06-19      出版日期: 2019-11-21
中图分类号:  B849: C91  
基金资助:* 国家自然科学基金项目(31700980);四川省社科规划基地项目(SC16E015);四川应用心理学研究中心项目(CSXL-162105)
通讯作者: 王建峰,戴冰     E-mail: wjfzy1985@163.com;daibing080402@126.com
引用本文:   
王建峰, 戴冰. (2020). “追名弃利”:权力动机与社会存在对亲社会行为的影响. 心理学报, 52(1): 55-65.
WANG Jianfeng, DAI Bing. (2020). The pursuit of fame at the expense of profit: The influence of power motive and social presence on prosocial behavior. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 52(1), 55-65.
链接本文:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00055      或      http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/Y2020/V52/I1/55
[1] Acton J. E. E. D. A., & Himmelfarb G . ( 1948). Essays on freedom and power. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
[2] Anderson C., & Kilduff G. J . ( 2009). The pursuit of status in social groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18( 5), 295-298.
[3] Aydinli A., Bender M., Chasiotis A., Cemalcilar Z., & van de Vijver F . ( 2014). When does self-reported prosocial motivation predict helping? The moderating role of implicit prosocial motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 38( 5), 645-658.
[4] Barclay P . ( 2013). Strategies for cooperation in biological markets, especially for humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 34( 3), 164-175.
[5] Bereczkei T., Birkas B., & Kerekes Z . ( 2010). The presence of others, prosocial traits, machiavellianism. Social Psychology, 41( 4), 238-245.
[6] Bergstrom C. T., & Lachmann M . ( 2001). Alarm calls as costly signals of antipredator vigilance: The watchful babbler game. Animal Behaviour, 61( 3), 535-543.
[7] Boehm C., & Flack J. C . ( 2010). The emergence of simple and complex power structures through social niche construction. In A. Guinote & T. K. Vescio (Eds.), The social psychology of power (pp. 46-86). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.
[8] Boksem M. A. S., Mehta P. H., van den Bergh B., van Son V., Trautmann S. T., Roelofs K., ... Sanfey A. G . ( 2013). Testosterone inhibits trust but promotes reciprocity. Psychological Science, 24( 11), 2306-2314.
[9] Carbon C. C., & Hesslinger V. M . ( 2011). Bateson et al.’s (2006) cues-of-being-watched paradigm revisited. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 70( 4), 203-210.
[10] Chasiotis A., Hofer J., & Campos D . ( 2006). When does liking children lead to parenthood? Younger siblings, implicit prosocial power motivation, and explicit love for children predict parenthood across cultures. Journal of Cultural and Evolutionary Psychology, 4( 2), 95-123.
[11] Dabbs J. M., Carr T. S., Frady R. L., & Riad J. K . ( 1995). Testosterone, crime, and misbehavior among 692 male prison inmates. Personality and Individual Differences, 18( 5), 627-633.
[12] de Waal F. B . ( 1998). Chimpanzee politics: Power and sex among apes Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
[13] Ditlmann R. K., Purdie-Vaughns V., Dovidio J. F., & Naft M. J . ( 2017). The implicit power motive in intergroup dialogues about the history of slavery. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112( 1), 116-135.
[14] Donhauser P. W., Rösch A. G., & Schultheiss O. C . ( 2015). The implicit need for power predicts recognition speed for dynamic changes in facial expressions of emotion. Motivation and Emotion, 39( 5), 714-721.
[15] Eisenberg N., Fabes R. A., & Sprinrad T. L . ( 1998). Prosocial development. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed., pp. 701-778). New York: Wiley.
[16] Eisenegger C., Naef M., Snozzi R., Heinrichs M., & Fehr E . ( 2010). Prejudice and truth about the effect of testosterone on human bargaining behaviour, Nature, 463( 7279), 356-359.
[17] Ekström M . ( 2012). Do watching eyes affect charitable giving? Evidence from a field experiment. Experimental Economics, 15( 3), 530-546.
[18] Faul F., Erdfelder E., Lang A. G., & Buchner A . ( 2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39( 2), 175-191.
[19] Fodor E. M., Wick D. P., & Conroy N. E . ( 2012). Power motivation as an influence on reaction to an imagined feminist dating partner. Motivation and Emotion, 36( 3), 301-310.
[20] Grafen A . ( 1990). Biological signals as handicaps. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 144( 4), 517-546.
[21] Griskevicius V., Tybur J. M., & van den Bergh B . ( 2010). Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98( 3), 392-404.
[22] Güth W., Schmittberger R., & Schwarze B . ( 1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 3( 4), 367-388.
[23] Hardy C. L., & van Vugt M . ( 2006). Nice guys finish first: The competitive altruism hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32( 10), 1402-1413.
[24] Henrich J., Boyd R., Bowles S., Camerer C., Fehr E., Gintis H., ... Henrich N. S . ( 2005). “Economic man” in cross- cultural perspective: Behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28( 6), 795-815.
[25] Hoffmann R., & Tee J. Y . ( 2006). Adolescent-adult interactions and culture in the ultimatum game. Journal of Economic Psychology, 27( 1), 98-116.
[26] Inoue Y., Takahashi T., Burriss R. P., Arai S., Hasegawa T., Yamagishi T., & Kiyonari T . ( 2017). Testosterone promotes either dominance or submissiveness in the Ultimatum Game depending on players’ social rank. Scientific Reports, 7( 1), 5335.
[27] Jiao C., Zhang M. Q., Wu L., & Ji W . ( 2010). The revised short version of multi-motive grid in mainland China. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 8( 1), 49-53.
[27] [ 焦璨, 张敏强, 吴利, 纪薇 . ( 2010). 多元动机网格测验(MMG-S)中文版的修订报告. 心理与行为研究, 8( 1), 49-53.]
[28] Keller J., & Pfattheicher S . ( 2011). Vigilant self-regulation, cues of being watched and cooperativeness. European Journal of Personality, 25( 5), 363-372.
[29] Kopányi-Peuker A., Offerman T., & Sloof R . ( 2017). Fostering cooperation through the enhancement of own vulnerability. Games and Economic Behavior, 101, 273-290.
[30] Kurzban R., DeScioli P., & O'Brien E . ( 2007). Audience effects on moralistic punishment. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28( 2), 75-84.
[31] Lammers J., & Stapel D. A . ( 2011). Power increases dehumanization. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14( 1), 113-126.
[32] Lammers J., Stoker J. I., Jordan J., Pollmann M. M. H., & Stapel D. A . ( 2011). Power increases infidelity among men and women. Psychological Science, 22( 9), 1191-1197.
[33] Lien J. W., & Zheng J . ( 2019). Self-commitment for cooperation. Working Paper.
[34] Lien J. W., Zheng J., & Zhuo Y . ( 2018). The cooperative consequences of contests. Working Paper.
[35] Magee J. C., & Langner C. A . ( 2008). How personalized and socialized power motivation facilitate antisocial and prosocial decision-making. Journal of Research in Personality, 42( 6), 1547-1559.
[36] Maner J. K., & Mead N. L . ( 2010). The essential tension between leadership and power: When leaders sacrifice group goals for the sake of self-interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99( 3), 482-497.
[37] Manesi Z., van Lange P. A. M., & Pollet T. V . ( 2015). Butterfly eyespots: Their potential influence on aesthetic preferences and conservation attitudes. PloS One, 10( 11), e0141433.
[38] McClelland D. C . ( 1970). The two faces of power. Journal of International Affairs, 24( 1), 29-47.
[39] Pfattheicher S., & Keller J . ( 2015). The watching eyes phenomenon: The role of a sense of being seen and public self-awareness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45( 5), 560-566.
[40] Ridgeway C., & Diekema D . ( 1989). Dominance and collective hierarchy formation in male and female task groups. American Sociological Review, 54( 1), 79-93.
[41] Russell B . ( 1938). Power: A new social analysis. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
[42] Schultheiss O. C., & Brunstein J. C . ( 2002). Inhibited power motivation and persuasive communication: A lens model analysis. Journal of Personality, 70( 4), 553-582.
[43] Schultheiss O. C., & Hale J. A . ( 2007). Implicit motives modulate attentional orienting to facial expressions of emotion. Motivation and Emotion, 31( 1), 13-24.
[44] Schultheiss O. C.,& Köllner M. G . (in press). Implicit motives. In O.P. John & R. W. Robins (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (4 ed.). New York: Guilford.
[45] Schultheiss O. C., Wirth M. M., Waugh C. E., Stanton S. J., Meier E. A., & Reuter-Lorenz P . ( 2008). Exploring the motivational brain: Effects of implicit power motivation on brain activation in response to facial expressions of emotion. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 3( 4), 333-343.
[46] Sellers J. G., Mehl M. R., & Josephs R. A . ( 2007). Hormones and personality: Testosterone as a marker of individual differences. Journal of Research in Personality, 41( 1), 126-138.
[47] Sokolowski K., Schmalt H. D., Langens T. A., & Puca R. M . ( 2000). Assessing achievement, affiliation, and power motives all at once: The Multi-Motive Grid (MMG). Journal of Personality Assessment, 74( 1), 126-145.
[48] Stanton S. J., & Schultheiss O. C . ( 2009). The hormonal correlates of implicit power motivation. Journal of Research in Personality, 43( 5), 942-949.
[49] van Honk J., Montoya E. R., Bos P. A., van Vugt M., & Terburg D . ( 2012). New evidence on testosterone and cooperation. Nature, 485( 7399), E4-E5.
[50] Vermeersch H., T'sjoen G., Kaufman J. M., Vincke J., & van Houtte M . ( 2010). Gender ideology, same-sex peer group affiliation and the relationship between testosterone and dominance in adolescent boys and girls. Journal of Biosocial Science, 42( 4), 463-475.
[51] , Vongas J. G., & Al Hajj R . ( 2017). The effects of competition and implicit power motive on men's testosterone, emotion recognition, and aggression. Hormones and Behavior, 92, 57-71.
[52] Wang J. F., Liu L., Yang Q. W., Zhang J. P., & Yan J. H . ( 2017). The implicit need for power predicts recognition memory for anger faces: An electrophysiological study. Personality and Individual Differences, 109, 207-214.
[53] Wang J. F., Liu L., & Yan J. H . ( 2014). Implicit power motive effects on the ERP processing of emotional intensity in anger faces. Journal of Research in Personality, 50, 90-97.
[54] Wang J. F., Liu L., & Zheng Y . ( 2011). Effects of implicit power motive on the processing of anger faces: An event- related potential study. Journal of Research in Personality, 45( 5), 441-447.
[55] Weber J. M., Kopelman S., & Messick D. M . ( 2004). A conceptual review of decision making in social dilemmas: Applying a logic of appropriateness. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8( 3), 281-307.
[56] Wedekind C., & Milinski M . ( 2000). Cooperation through image scoring in humans. Science, 288( 5467), 850-852.
[57] Wibral M., Dohmen T., Klingmüller D., Weber B., & Falk A . ( 2012). Testosterone administration reduces lying in men. PloS One, 7( 10), e46774.
[58] Willer R . ( 2009). Groups reward individual sacrifice: The status solution to the collective action problem. American Sociological Review, 74( 1), 23-43.
[59] Winter D. G. ( 1973). The power motive. New York: Free Press.
[60] Xin Z. Q., Liu Y. H., Yang Z. X., & Zhang H. C . ( 2016). Effects of minimal social cues on trust in the investment game. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 19( 3), 235-243.
[61] Zurbriggen E. L . ( 2000). Social motives and cognitive power- sex associations: Predictors of aggressive sexual behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78( 3), 559-581.
[1] 张丹丹,王驹,赵君,陈淑美,黄琰淋,高秋凤. 抑郁倾向对合作的影响:双人同步近红外脑成像研究[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(5): 609-622.
[2] 王文超,伍新春. 共情对灾后青少年亲社会行为的影响:感恩、社会支持和创伤后成长的中介作用[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(3): 307-316.
[3] 丁瑛,钟嘉琦. 社会拥挤对自我提升类产品偏好的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(2): 216-228.
[4] 张如倩,刘洁琼,李先春. 社会互动视角下人际公平形成的脑机制[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(9): 1007-1017.
[5] 金心怡,周冰欣,孟斐. 3岁幼儿的二级观点采择及合作互动的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(9): 1028-1039.
[6] 孙倩,龙长权,王修欣,刘永芳. 公平或是利益?权力对分配公平感的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(8): 958-968.
[7] 朱玥,谢江佩,金杨华,施俊琦. 团队权力分布差异对团队冲突的影响:程序公平和合法性的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(7): 829-840.
[8] 黎晓丹,丁道群,叶浩生. 身体姿势启动的内隐权力感对公平决策的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(1): 106-116.
[9] 张勇, 刘海全, 王明旋, 青 平.  挑战性压力和阻断性压力对员工创造力的影响:自我效能的中介效应与组织公平的调节效应[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(4): 450-461.
[10] 窦凯, 刘耀中, 王玉洁, 聂衍刚.  “乐”于合作:感知社会善念诱导合作行为的情绪机制[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(1): 101-114.
[11] 柯淳淳, 聂爱情, 张瑞卿.  回忆任务对合作抑制和错误修剪的调节 ——情绪效价和编码水平的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(6): 733-744.
[12] 张书维.  社会公平感、机构信任度与公共合作意向[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(6): 794-813.
[13] 王艳辉;李董平;孙文强;赵力燕;赖雪芬;周月月. 亲子依恋与初中生亲社会行为:有调节的中介效应[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(5): 663-679.
[14] 刘文, 张雪, 张玉, 俞睿玮.  4~8岁儿童公平认知与行为差距: 社会比较的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(12): 1504-1512.
[15] 崔丽莹, 何幸, 罗俊龙, 黄晓娇, 曹玮佳, 陈晓梅.  道德与关系惩罚对初中生公共物品困境中合作行为的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(10): 1322-1333.
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