心理学报, 2018, 50(10): 1180-1196 doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.01180

研究报告

群际评价中热情与能力关系的情境演变:评价意图与结果的作用

佐斌1,2, 温芳芳,1,2, 吴漾3, 代涛涛1

1华中师范大学心理学院暨社会心理研究中心

2青少年网络心理与行为教育部重点实验室, 武汉 430079

3华中科技大学马克思主义学院, 武汉 430074

Situational evolution of the relationship between warmth and competence in intergroup evaluation: Impact of evaluating intention and behavioral outcomes

ZUO Bin1,2, WEN Fangfang,1,2, WU Yang3, DAI Taotao1

1 School of Psychology, Center for Studies of Social Psychology, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China

2 Key Laboratory of Adolescent Cyberpsychology and Behavior, Ministry of Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China

3 School of Marxism, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China

通讯作者: 温芳芳, E-mail:wenff@mail.ccnu.edu.cn

收稿日期: 2017-11-13   网络出版日期: 2018-10-15

基金资助: * 国家自然科学基金项目.  31571147
国家自然科学基金项目.  31400903
华中师范大学中央基本科研业务费重大培育项目资助.  CCNU18ZDPY12
华中师范大学中央基本科研业务费重大培育项目资助.  CCNU14Z02015

Received: 2017-11-13   Online: 2018-10-15

摘要

情境影响社会认知, 在群际评价时热情和能力两个维度的关系如何随着情境而变化?本文采用“遥远星球范式”对此进行了系列实验研究, 分别基于热情和能力的单维和双维信息呈现视角, 检验竞争与合作两种情境下成功和失败的结果对群体热情与能力感知的影响。结果表明:(1)在对外群体的热情和能力感知中, 由热情维度推断能力时两者存在正向关系; 由能力维度推断热情时则存在负向关系。(2)评价意图对外群体成员热情和能力评价的影响与具体情境无关。人们对外群体成员的热情和能力评价在得知互动意图时均呈现“趋中”平衡的趋势。(3)成败结果对外群体成员热情和能力评价的影响受到情境的制约。竞争情境中热情和能力表现出“此消彼长”的反向演变趋势, 而合作情境中热情和能力表现出“同消同长”的同向演变趋势。

关键词: 刻板印象内容 ; 热情 ; 能力 ; 情境演变 ; 成败 ; 群际评价

Abstract

Two critical dimensions, warmth and competence, feature prominently in people’s social cognitive processes, and there is a great deal of research examining the nature of these two dimensions and their relationships. Recently, researchers have become increasingly interested in the situational dependency that may characterize people’s perceptions of these two dimensions. However, past research has only considered the effect of simple and repeated interactions, leaving the nature and outcomes of the interactions unexamined. According to social interdependence theory, the competitive or cooperative interactions between groups may elicit disparate downstream effects on perceptions of group members. Various theoretical perspectives converged on the notion that the outcomes of previous interaction sessions may exercise a crucial but differential impact on the warmth and competence rating of outgroup members. The current work aimed to investigate the joint effect of the competitive/collaborative context and the interaction outcomes on people’s warmth and competence ratings as well as the relationship between the two dimensions.

The current research explored this problem in two studies. We investigated how the result of success or failure affects intergroup evaluation in different situations of competition and cooperation. A total of 496 undergraduates were recruited. In all four of our experiments, we used the Distant Planetary Paradigm and imagined a four-stage encounter with an alien prospecting team, with the characteristics and outcomes of each session manipulated according to experimental design. After each stage of the encounter, participants rated their perceptions of the warmth and competence of the alien groups.

The results showed that: (1) a positive relationship between warmth and competence ratings was observed when participants inferred competence from warmth-related information, and when they inferred warmth from competence-related information, the relationship reversed; (2) during the first stage of interaction, knowing the coaction intention of the outgroup exerted an overarching “centralizing” effect over people’s perception of the member of that outgroup, with the ratings on both dimensions showing a compensatory tendency; and (3) the effect of interaction outcome was contingent on the coaction contexts, such that in a competition context, ratings of warmth and competence exhibited an anti-parallel tendency as the four-stage interactions unfolded, such that a successful outcome may cause a rising-warmth-falling-competence tendency and a failure outcome may cause a warmth-falling-competence rising tendency, whereas in a cooperation context, ratings on the two dimensions evolved in a parallel fashion, such that a successful cooperation may cause an overall increase in ratings on both dimensions and a failed cooperation may cause overall falling ratings on both dimensions.

In conclusion, the current research is the first to explore the situational evolution of the relationship between warmth and competence ratings in intergroup evaluations, and has important implications for the future inter-group relationship research. This line of inquiry makes a novel contribution to the field by examining how social relationships within joint activities could influence behavior and intentions toward members of an outgroup.

Keywords: stereotype content ; warmth ; competence ; situational evolution ; success-failure ; intergroup evaluation

PDF (513KB) 元数据 多维度评价 相关文章 导出 EndNote| Ris| Bibtex  收藏本文

本文引用格式

佐斌, 温芳芳, 吴漾, 代涛涛. (2018). 群际评价中热情与能力关系的情境演变:评价意图与结果的作用. 心理学报, 50(10), 1180-1196

ZUO Bin, WEN Fangfang, WU Yang, DAI Taotao. (2018). Situational evolution of the relationship between warmth and competence in intergroup evaluation: Impact of evaluating intention and behavioral outcomes. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(10), 1180-1196

在人类社会生活中, 群际评价在消除群际冲突、偏见和歧视中扮演着重要角色,一直是社会心理学关注的热点之一。然而, 研究者很少从社会互动情境演变的角度来对群际评价进行动态考察。现实生活中的群际评价并非是静止不变的过程, 随着 群际间的接触互动与反馈等情境的变化, 群际评价也会发生相应的改变(Vezzali, Turner, Capozza, & Trifiletti, 2018; Capozza, Bernardo, & Falvo, 2017)。立足社会认知的“大二”模型(佐斌, 代涛涛, 温芳芳, 索玉贤, 2015), 本研究分别基于热情(warmth)和能力(competence)单维和双维的视角, 首次考察群际之间的热情与能力评价随着时间和情境演变而发生改变的心理过程。一方面, 从情境互动演变的角度认识群际关系具有重要的现实生态意义, 另一方面也为更深刻理解社会认知“大二”模型中热情和能力的关系提供群际评价的新视角。

1 问题提出

以往研究表明, 情境对群际评价会产生重要影响(Meeusen, Barlow, & Sibley, 2017)。群际评价的情境互依性最早可以追溯到Sherif经典的Robbers Cave实验, 在实验中, 21名11~12岁的男孩被邀请参加夏令营活动并分成“老鹰队”和“响尾蛇队”两组。在资源稀缺的竞争情境中即某一群体会因另一群体的成功而受到不利影响时, 两个群体之间产生了消极的群际评价与行为; 随后, 当两个群体面临一系列需要共同解决的问题, 在牵涉共同利益的合作情境中, 两个群体又重归于好, 彼此产生了积极的群际评价(Sherif, Harvey, White, Hood, & Sherif, 1961)。此外, 有研究者发现明亮和黑暗的情境也会对群际评价产生影响, 黑暗情境下人们对外群体成员表现出更消极的群际评价(Schaller, Park, & Paulkner, 2003)。

新近, 研究者越来越聚焦群际评价会受到群 体互动等情境动态演变的影响(Durrheim, Quayle, Tredoux, Titlestad, & Tooke, 2016)。例如, Chen和Li (2009)的研究发现, 随着时间和轮次的改变, 人们对内群体和外群体分配的金额差异会逐渐增加; Cacault, Goette, Lalive和Thoenig (2015)的研究也表明在先前几轮中的外群体攻击行为会影响后面轮次中的群体利他给予; Dorrough, Glöckner, Hellmann和Ebert (2015)同样发现在第一轮时对内外群体的评价不存在明显的差异, 但随着后面几轮重复接触的增加, 人们的内群体偏好逐渐增加, 特别是在第10轮和第11轮进行群体间转换时, 人们的群际评价改变更加明显。可见, 群际评价会动态地受到群际互动的行为及结果的影响, 表现出明显的情境互依性。

然而, 以往的这类研究仅考察了简单的、多次重复的互动对群际行为的影响, 并未考虑互动的性质和结果的作用。处于竞争关系的群体在多次重 复接触后群际行为上的变化, 很可能与处于合作 关系的群体不同。根据社会互依性理论(Social Interdependence Theory), 人们在社会互动中存在合作与竞争两类互依关系。在合作型互依关系中, 个人的成功以他人成功为基础并寻求共赢的局面, 合作者之间共担责任, 关系融洽; 而在竞争型互依关系中, 个人的成功以他人的失败为代价, 合作之间相互竞争, 消极对立(Johnson, 2003; Uskul & Over, 2017)。有研究表明, 无论是在积极还是在消极的群际接触中, 感知到的群体威胁都是重要机制(Kanas, Scheepers, & Sterkens, 2017), 在竞争型互依关系中, 人们感知到更高的群体威胁, 会倾向于更消极的群际评价。相对于竞争关系, 合作型互依可以明显降低群体成员的紧张与受威胁感(Wolgast & Fischer, 2017), 而这种紧张与威胁感会导致较强的内群体认同、内群体偏好与外群体贬损行为; 对于弱势的一方, 与强势一方建立合作型互依关系甚至可以暂时消除长期弱势地位带来的对心理与行为的影响, 如当与男性共同完成空间任务时, 以往女性受“空间能力差”的刻板印象威胁而表现出的绩效降低现象会明显减弱甚至完全消失(Wen, Zuo, Wu, Dong, & Wang, 2016)。因此, 在考察互动全程中群际行为的改变时, 有必要进一步考察互动的不同性质或不同结果的影响(Dovidio, Love, Schellhaas, & Hewstone, 2017)。还有研究表明, 积极和消极 群际接触会产生不对称的心理效应, 其中, 消极接触会更明显增加偏见和回避等的消极效应更明显(Hayward, Tropp, Hornsey, & Barlow, 2017)。那么, 在竞争与合作情境中, 成功与失败的积极和消极的结果会导致人们怎样的群际评价演变呢?本研究拟对此进行探索。

人们对群体的评价, 还可能受到评价维度以及维度之间关系的影响(Rast, Gaffney, & Yang, 2017)。社会认知的“大二”模型表明, 人们常通过热情和 能力两个维度来对他人进行感知评价(Cislak & Wojciske, 2008; 佐斌 等, 2015)。热情作为对他人行为意图的衡量指标, 反映着人们形成与维护社会联结的需要, 表征他人的友善、乐于助人和值得信赖; 能力是评价某人实现他或她意图和目标的程度与可能性指标, 表征他人的智力、技能和高效率(Abele et al., 2016; Fiske, Cuddy, & Glick, 2007; Fiske, 2018; Clough, & Bates, 2017)。在实际的对人认知中, 热情与能力的关系是复杂的, 除了受到对象真实情况的影响, 在两个维度上的评价也会互相产生影响。概括而言, 热情和能力之间可能存在两种关系, 一种是正向关系, 如晕轮效应等, 另一种则是负向关系, 如补偿效应和影射效应等(佐斌, 代涛涛, 温芳芳, 滕婷婷, 2014)。

已有实验研究发现, 热情和能力可能存在正向关系, 例如, Judd等(2005)向被试分别呈现不同能力水平或热情水平的两个虚拟群体, 然后让被试对其中一个群体的热情和能力进行评价, 结果发现, 对群体的热情和能力感知存在晕轮效应, 当知觉对象为高热情或高能力时, 知觉者对其另一个维度的感知也具有较高水平, 反之亦然。不过, 值得一提的是, 在Judd等人(2005)的实验中, 虽然高能力组比低能力组的热情得分更高, 但并没有达到显著水平(佐斌 等, 2014)。同时, 也有研究者发现热情和能力可能存在负向关系, 例如, 在补偿效应的研究中, 研究结果表明, 当两个社会目标在热情或能力上存在差异时, 人们会对他们另一个维度上的评价进行相反方向的补偿(Kervyn, Yzerbyt, Judd, & Nunes, 2009; Kervyn, Yzerbyt, & Judd, 2011); 同样, 影射效应的研究也发现, 当只向被试呈现对目标对象在热情或能力其中一个维度的积极描述时, 被试会对另一个维度进行消极推断(Kervyn, Bergsieker, & Fiske, 2012)。这些研究大多采用热情和能力单维信息呈现的视角, 即向被试呈现热情或能力某一个维度上的信息, 让被试推断目标另一维度的信息。可以看出, 基于热情和能力单一维度信息呈现的研究中, 热情和能力之间的关系存在比较复杂的不一致的结果。

因此, 本研究拟探讨人们如何评价不同热情或能力水平的外群体成员。首先, 根据阿希的热情中心特质说(Asch, 1946)和热情优先效应(Fiske et al., 2007; Abele, Bruckmüller, & Wojciszke, 2014)等相关研究, 我们假设, 基于热情维度信息推断对象的能力时, 会产生晕轮效应的正向关系, 即人们对高热情外群体会做出与高热情-高能力外群体类似的判断, 而对低热情外群体会做出与低热情-低能力外群体类似的判断。其次, 对于能力维度向热情维度的推断, 通过对以往热情和能力存在负向关系的研究进行分析, 可以发现, 补偿效应和影射效应的产生总是依赖于一定的比较任务情境(Kervyn et al., 2011; 代涛涛, 佐斌, 温芳芳, 2014), 这些负向关系所依赖的比较任务情境条件可能更多是能力维度在起作用, 因此, 在此假设, 由能力维度推断热情维度时会存在负向关系, 即人们对高能力外群体会做出与高能力-低热情外群体类似的判断, 而对低能力外群体则会做出与低能力-高热情外群体类似的判断。在此基础上, 本文拟进一步考察单维信息呈现和双维信息呈现对于群际评价的影响, 即对刻板印象内容模型(Stereotype Content Model, SCM)的热情和能力双维信息组合呈现的群体(高热情-高能力、低热情-低能力、低热情-高能力、高热情-低能力)感知是否与仅呈现单维度信息时的评价存在差异。

依据群际评价互依性一致的观点, 人们并非简单纯粹地对外群体的热情和能力进行知觉判断, 这一判断往往还受到情境等因素的影响。而以往对热情与能力感知的情境因素, 主要聚焦于与热情和能力分别相匹配的任务情境, 如社交和学业任务情境(Kervyn et al., 2012)以及现实群体冲突理论的日常冲突情境(Ufkes, Otten, van der Zee, Giebels, & Dovidio, 2011), 尚未有研究涉及竞争与合作这两大现代社会群体互动的主要情境。本研究尝试对于竞争与合作情境中行动前的意图评价阶段以及行动后的成败结果阶段, 分别对外群体热情和能力感知的动态演变进行探索。

目前关于热情和能力两维度与竞争合作情境的关系具有不同的理论解释。第一, 基于进化心理学的解释, SCM认为刻板印象根源于全人类群体普遍存在的社会现象:为了自身的利益和生存, 人们会不自觉地确认其他群体是朋友还是敌人(是否热情)以及他们对自己是否可以构成威胁(是否有能力) (Fiske, 1993; Bettelheim & Janowitz, 1950; 佐斌, 张阳阳, 赵菊, 王娟, 2009)。据此, 可推断在竞争与合作行动之前即在得知外群体的意图阶段, 人们对外群体的判断可能不会受到具体情境的影响, 而更多会无意识地或自发基于增加防御和降低威胁的考虑降低对外群体成员热情的评价, 以避免意图误判带来灾难性后果。基于进化的观点, 可做出如下假设:一方面, 基于自身生存考虑, 人们为降低对高热情外群体“友好”的虚假判断, 以及提升对低能力外群体潜在威胁的正确感知, 可能会不自觉地降低对高热情外群体的热情判断并提升对低能力外群体的能力感知; 另一方面, 基于自身利益考虑, 人们为提升与低热情外群体的有效互动以及在与高能力外群体互动中处于平等地位, 人们可能会自发提升对低热情外群体的热情感知而降低对高能力外群体的能力感知。概括而言, 人们在行动前的评价意图阶段, 对外群体的热情和能力感知会表现出“趋中”平衡的趋势。第二, 基于本体论和功能论的解释, 人类以保持自利性和亲和性两种状态而存在(Bakan, 1966), 而能力和热情两维度分别对应了这两种生存状态。热情与能力评价反映了人们在现实世界中所面临的两大任务:获得社会认可及与他人形成社会联结, 获得能力肯定和社会地位。根据功能论的解释, SCM中群体的热情和能力刻板印象感知并非单纯反映对群体成员的正确认知, 从功能主义和实用主义观点来看, 热情和能力的感知更多为了反映和维护群际关系系统(Abele et al., 2014)。根据本体论和功能论的解释可以推断, 在竞争与合作行动后的成败结果阶段, 人们对外群体的热情与能力判断更多依赖于自利性和亲和性的权衡考量。在此假设, 在竞争情境, 当与外群体成员竞争成功时, 人们为保持群际关系互动的亲和性会提升对其热情的评价, 为了增强自我能力和地位会降低对外群体能力的评价; 当竞争失败时, 基于亲和性的考虑人们会降低对其热情评价, 基于自利性的考虑人们会提升对其能力评价; 在合作情境, 当与外群体合作成功时, 人们对外群体的热情和能力评价都会上升; 而在合作失败时, 人们会同时降低对其热情和能力的评价。

总体而言, 本研究拟分别基于热情和能力的单维与双维视角, 通过两个平行研究4个实验考察人们对外群体热情和能力感知在不同竞争与合作评价意图的情境中以及不同成败结果后的动态演变趋势。具体而言, 研究1基于单维视角, 通过两个实验分别考察合作与竞争情境下, 人们在初次接触、评价意图、得知成功或失败情境的群际评价; 研究2则基于双维视角, 同样通过两个实验分别考察合作与竞争情境下, 人们在初次接触、评价意图、得知成功或失败情境的群际评价演变情况。

2 研究1:基于热情或能力单维信息呈现的视角

2.1 研究目的与假设

基于热情和能力的单维信息呈现视角, 通过实验1和实验2分别考察在竞争和合作情境中, 人们对外群体成员的热情和能力感知在初次接触、得知意图、任务成功以及任务失败4种情形下的演变情况。研究假设:(1)在行动前的评价意图阶段, 对外群体的热情和能力感知会表现出“趋中”平衡的趋势。(2)在竞争情境, 当与外群体成员竞争成功时, 会降低对外群体能力的评价; 当竞争失败时会提升对其能力评价; 在合作情境, 当与外群体合作成功时, 对外群体的热情和能力评价都会上升; 而在合作失败时, 会同时降低对其热情和能力的评价。

2.2 实验1:竞争情境

实验1旨在探讨竞争情境下, 人们对不同刻板印象内容(高能力、低能力、高热情和低热情)的外群体成员, 分别在初次接触、得知竞争意图、竞争成功、竞争失败4种不同情境中的热情和能力评价演变趋势。

2.2.1 被试

武汉某高校本科生102名, 其中男生24人, 女生78人, 平均年龄为24.04岁, 标准差为3.02岁。

2.2.2 实验设计

采用4(刻板印象内容:高热情、低热情、高能力和低能力)×4(评价情境:初次接触、得知意图、任务成功和任务失败)×2(评价维度:热情、能力)组内设计。因变量为对外群体成员在不同情形下的热情和能力维度评价, 采用测量刻板印象内容的特质词进行7分等级评价, 热情特质包括“热情的”、“友好的”, 能力特质包括“聪明的”、“有能力的” (Abele et al., 2014)。

2.2.3 实验材料

通过“遥远星球范式” (Distant Planetary Paradigm)的一个变式来操纵刻板印象内容的热情和能力维度的不同水平(Ufkes et al., 2011)。遥远星球范式最早由Hoffman和Hurst (1990)提出, 为了表明特质与类别群体之间如何形成刻板化的关联(如性别刻板印象是否源于人们对社会角色的不同分布的推理), 他们认为在研究中不能使用人们所熟悉的类别群体, 为了排除人们对一些熟悉类别所具有的先前印象的影响, 通过创建遥远星球上的虚拟群体来进行类别的操作。Hoffman等采用遥远星球上的两种虚拟类别成员, 一种有80% “抚养儿童者”, 20% “城市工人”; 另一种则是20% “抚养儿童者”, 80% “城市工人”, 并且指明此星球不存在男性和女性来进行类别条件的操作。利用此方法, 巧妙让被试形成了基于社会分工角色类别的刻板印象。

在Hoffman等人研究基础上, Ufkes等人(2011)发展了“遥远星球范式”的变式, 通过给被试呈现外星球虚拟群体的不同特质信息描述来进行刻板印象内容热情和能力维度的操作。例如, 遥远星球Morfs上的外星人, 高热情描述即高EQ (平均130, 范围120~140)、友好的、擅长社交的; 低热情描述即低EQ (平均70, 范围60~80)、自私的、攻击性的; 高能力描述即高IQ (均值130, 范围120~140)、聪明的、能干的; 低能力描述即低IQ (平均70, 范围60~80)、低效的、愚笨的等。这一变式可以排除人们对真实群体的先前信念的混淆, 在他们随后对这些虚拟群体IQ和EQ评价的开放式问题以及刻板印象内容问卷测量(如“我认为Morfs是友好的”)的两个操作性检验均是有效的。

本研究使用与Ufkes等(2011)类似方法, 采用组内设计, 虚拟了4个外星球群体, 分别命名为没有实际意义的字母组合, 如高EQ的“Wahrn”群体, 低EQ的“Lsejt”群体, 低IQ的“Morlc”群体和高IQ的“Zaufs”群体。使用“遥远星球范式”虚拟物种(群体)的方法, 可以避免被试联想到任何真实存在的群体, 这样就能确保产生的效应由刻板印象内容所引起的, 同样此方法巧妙排除了任何已有的关于真实群体的信念和无关线索的干扰。然后通过设计被试与Morfs之间的“通过一场比赛来决定开采星球资源的权利”, 通过比赛的输赢操控成功和失败的结果。

2.2.4 实验程序

告知被试本实验旨在探索人们在某些特殊情境下的真实感受和反应, 请被试尽可能让自己设身处地投入情境之中, 根据真实的感受作答。随后给被试介绍某个遥远星球上的一个虚拟群体信息, 包括该群体的总体EQ/IQ (情商和智商)水平以及与之相对应的群体成员的典型特质。为了让被试理解EQ/IQ的概念, 在介绍虚拟群体之前先向被试展示对应概念的意义以及其分布(正常人的平均水平是100, 正常范围是85到115)。

实验1通过系统地改变虚拟群体的信息操纵刻板印象的热情和能力。在低热情的情境, 把虚拟群体描述为情商低(平均水平为70, 范围是60到80之间), 成员普遍冷漠、自私、具有攻击性。在高热情组, 虚拟群体被描述为情商高(平均水平130, 范围是120到140之间), 成员普遍热情、友善、待人温和。对能力刻板印象采用类似操作。低能力组的虚拟群体具有低智商的特点(平均水平为70, 范围是60到80之间), 成员普遍是愚蠢、低效、无能的; 高能力组的虚拟群体的智商高(平均水平130, 范围是120到140之间), 成员普遍都是聪明、能干、效率高的。实验中要求被试在不同的阶段对目标进行评价。

(1)初次接触阶段, 直接让被试对所描述的外群体成员的热情和能力进行评价;

(2)得知意图阶段, 在竞争情境, 向被试展示情境指导语, 让被试想象由于地球资源紧张, 被试和被试的团队作为代表到某星球开采一种能源, 可是某个虚拟群体也看上了那个星球的能源。于是被试的团队和这个虚拟群体达成了一个协议, 通过一场比赛来决定开采的权利。然后在被试对外群体成员的热情和能力进行评价。

(3)任务成功阶段, 让被试进一步想象, 假如“结果, 你们赢得了比赛, 也获得了该星球的能源。”接着让被试对外群体成员进行热情和能力评价。

(4)任务失败阶段, 让被试想象“然而, 很遗憾, 你们输了比赛, 也失去了该星球的能源。”最后让被试再对外群体成员进行热情和能力评价。

2.2.5 结果分析

(1)操作检验结果

首先对“遥远星球范式”所形成的热情和能力印象进行操作性检验, 分别计算出初次接触时热情和能力维度的特质评价均值, 其中, 高热情(M = 6.02, SD = 0.95); 低热情(M = 2.18, SD = 1.21); 高能力(M = 5.85, SD = 1.03); 低热情(M = 2.67, SD = 1.19)。然后, 分别跟7分等级评价的中值4进行独立样本t检验, 结果发现均与中值存在显著差异 (ps < 0.001), 表明“遥远星球范式”操作刻板印象内容有效。

(2)描述性统计结果

竞争情境中, 对不同刻板印象内容的外群体成员(高热情、低热情、高能力、低能力)在4种不同情境阶段(初次接触、得知意图、任务成功、任务失败), 人们对外群体的热情和能力感知的描述性结果如表1所示。

表1   竞争情境中人们对不同刻板印象内容外群体4种阶段的热情和能力感知[M (SD)]

情境 高热情 低热情 高能力 低能力
热情 能力 热情 能力 热情 能力 热情 能力
初次接触 5.98 (0.97) 5.27 (1.02) 2.27 (1.31) 3.85 (1.36) 4.25 (1.23) 6.02 (1.00) 4.17 (1.31) 2.73 (1.25)
得知意图 5.06 (1.22) 5.33 (1.07) 2.37 (1.35) 4.00 (1.40) 3.80 (1.36) 5.83 (1.05) 3.75 (1.34) 3.12 (1.35)
任务成功 5.11 (1.23) 4.85 (1.17) 2.67 (1.54) 3.45 (1.44) 4.08 (1.34) 5.10 (1.14) 3.74 (1.33) 2.64 (1.31)
任务失败 4.73 (1.34) 5.78 (1.04) 2.54 (1.50) 4.66 (1.26) 3.67 (1.37) 5.92 (1.12) 3.53 (1.42) 4.43 (1.27)

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


(3) 4种不同情境阶段对不同刻板印象内容外群体的热情和能力评价

针对被试的评分数据进行4(情境)×4(评价对象)×2(评价维度)的三因素组内设计, 结果见图1, 可见三因素交互作用显著, F(9, 945) = 22.74, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.18。其余的主效应与二项交互均显著(p < 0.001)。为更准确地检验实验假设, 将数据按照情境变化的程度分为两部分, 分别考察其偏交互作用(partial interaction), 即“初次接触-得知竞争意 图-成功”以及“初次接触-得知合作意图-失败”两部分。

图1

图1   竞争情境中4种不同阶段对不同刻板印象内容外群体的热情和能力评价


在“成功”情况下(忽略“失败”水平), 三因素交互显著, F(6,100) = 13.78, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.45。为考察能力热情评价随情境不断变化而发生的变化, 将情境视为具有一定连续性的变量, 因而采用趋势效应分析考察这一线性变化趋势受到维度以及评价对象的调节作用。

首先, 情境的总体线性趋势非常显著, F(1,105) = 40.44, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.28, 总体二次线性趋势不显著, F(1,105) = 0.43, p = 0.51。换言之, 仅考虑情境趋势时, 总体呈一次线性变化, 从初次见面、得知竞争意图至成功, 在不考虑评价维度和对象时被 试的评分存在整体逐步下降的趋势。在此基础上, 进一步考察维度与对象可能存在的调节作用。针对一次线性趋势进行分析, 可见三因素交互显著, F(3,103) = 26.04, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.43, 即评分随情境而变化的线性趋势显著地受到评价维度与评价对象的调节。从评价对象的角度考察简单交互效应, 可见在评价四类对象时简单交互效应均显著, 但模式存在差异(ps < 0.001)。在评价高热情外群体时, 随着情境变化, 无论热情[F(1,105) = 58.98, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.36]还是能力维度[F(1,105) = 18.41, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.15]均呈现显著线性降低的趋势, 且在热情维度上降低的程度更大; 在评价低热情对象时, 热情维度上呈现显著线性上升趋势[F(1,105) = 17.60, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.14], 但在能力维度上呈现显著下降趋势[F(1,105) = 13.51, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.11]; 在评价高能力对象时, 热情维度上的线性趋势不显著[F(1,105) = 2.43, p = 0.12, ηp2 = 0.02], 而能力上呈现显著下降趋势[F(1,105) = 75.90, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.42]; 在评价低能力对象时, 热情维度上呈现显著下降趋势[F(1,105) = 15.48, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.13], 而能力维度上一次线性趋势不显著[F(1,105) = 0.95, p = 0.33, ηp2 = 0.01]。

将情境视为二次线性趋势的三因素交互作用显著, F(3,103) = 244.727, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.88. 针对显著的三因素交互, 从评价维度的角度可以发现在热情维度上, 评价对象与情境的简单交互显著, F(3,103) = 5.120, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.13, 但在能力维度上对象与情境的简单交互不显著, F(3,103) = 1.80, p = 0.15, ηp2 = 0.05。换言之, 被试在评价四类对 象的能力维度时, 总体存在先上升后下降的趋势[F(1,105) = 68.41, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.39], 这一二次线性趋势在不同对象之间不存在显著差异。在热情维度上, 可见仅在评价高热情对象[F(1,105) = 31.95, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.23]、高能力对象[F(1,105) = 15.73, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.13]、低能力对象[F(1,105) = 9.74, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.09]时, 情境变化的二次线性趋势显著, 均呈现先下降后上升的趋势。

在“失败”情况下(忽略“成功”水平), 三因素交互显著, F(6,100) = 17.90, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.52。进一步考察能力热情评价随情境不断变化而发生的变化, 采用趋势效应分析分别检验情境变化对评价的一次和二次效应。结果发现情境的一次线性趋势效应仅达到边缘显著, F(1,105) = 3.64, p = 0.059, ηp2 = 0.03, 而二次线性趋势的效应显著, F(1,105) = 53.01, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.34。然而, 虽然情境一次线性趋势的主效应不显著, 但这一不显著的结果可能与交互作用有关, 进一步分析发现情境的一次线性趋势与评价对象、维度的三因素交互作用显著, F(3,103) = 32.77, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.49。针对显著的三因素交互, 从评价对象的角度考察, 可见在评价四类对象时情境变化与维度的简单交互作用均显著。

当评价高热情对象时, 随着“初次见面-得知竞争意图-失败”的变化, 热情维度上呈现显著的一次线性下降趋势, F(1,105) = 78.82, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.43, 能力维度上则呈现显著上升的趋势, F(1,105) = 31.73, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.23; 在评价低热情对象时, 热情[F(1,105) = 7.71, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.07]与能力维度[F(1,105) = 44.34, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.30]上均呈现上升趋势, 但能力维度的趋势更明显; 在评价高能力对象时, 热情维度评价显著下降, F(1,105) = 26.25, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.20, 而能力维度上变化不显著, F(1,105) = 1.79, p = 0.18, ηp2 = 0.02; 在评价低能力对象时, 热情维度上出现显著下降趋势, F(1,105) = 24.53, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.19, 而能力维度上出现显著上升趋势, F(1,105) = 145.90, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.58.

将情境视为二次线性趋势的三因素交互作用显著, F(3,103) = 262.26, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.88。针对显著的三因素交互, 从评价对象的角度考察, 可见当评价低热情外群体[F(1,105) = 7.77, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.07]和低能力外群体时[F(1,105) = 9.28, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.08], 简单交互效应显著, 评价其余两类对象时情境与维度的简单交互效应不显著(ps > 0.24), 因此分别考察低热情与低能力外群体对象。在评价低热情对象时, 可见热情维度上变化不显著(p = 0.57), 而能力上二次线性趋势非常显著, F(1,105) = 14.70, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.12, 呈现出先下降后上升的趋势。评价低能力对象时, 同样发现热情维度上变化不显著(p = 0.16), 能力上呈现显著的先下降后上升的趋势, F(1,117) = 26.57, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.20。

2.2.6 讨论

基于单维信息呈现的视角, 对不同刻板印象内容的外群体成员在竞争的4种不同情境的热情和能力评价趋势进行分析(见图1)可以发现:(1)在评价意图阶段, 即在告知将要与外群体竞争的阶段, 人们对于高热情、低能力的外群体均表现出热情下降、能力上升的评价, 热情和能力变化表现出相反方向的变化趋势; 而对于低热情的外群体表现出热情和能力均上升的评价, 对高能力的外群体表现出热情和能力下降的评价, 即热情和能力变化表现出相同方向的变化趋势。(2)在评价结果阶段, 即在想象与外群体竞争结果成功和失败后的评价, 在竞争成功阶段, 对于高热情、低热情、高能力的外群体均表现出热情上升, 能力下降的趋势, 只有对于低能力的外群体的热情和能力均下降; 而在竞争失败阶段, 对于高热情、低热情、高能力和低能力的外群体均表现出热情下降, 能力上升的趋势。

2.3 实验2:合作情境

与实验1不同, 实验2旨在探讨合作情境下, 人们对不同刻板印象内容(高能力、低能力、高热情和低热情)的外群体成员, 分别在初次接触、得知合作意图、合作成功、合作失败4种不同情境中的热情和能力评价演变趋势。

2.3.1 被试

武汉某高校本科生148名, 其中男生63人, 女生85人, 平均年龄为21.67岁, 标准差为2.79岁。

2.3.2 实验设计

采用与实验1相同的实验设计, 因变量为4种不同情境阶段(初次接触、得知合作意图、合作成功、合作失败), 对外群体成员的热情和能力评价 得分。

2.3.3 实验材料

与实验1的材料相同, 所不同的是竞争情境换成了合作情境。

2.3.4 实验程序

实验2的总体流程与实验1相同, 不同的是向被试展示的情境指导语不同, 将实验1的竞争情境换成合作情境“你们团队和某个虚拟群体达成了一个协议, 通过合作来找到利用该星球能源的技术, 你们的合作程度将决定你们能否成功利用该星球的能源。” 在成功情境阶段, 则向被试呈现:“结果, 你们合作成功, 很快就掌握了利用该能源的技术, 获得了新的能源”。在失败情境阶段, 向被试呈现:“然而, 很遗憾, 你们合作失败了, 始终没能掌握利用该能源的技术, 你们团队无功而返”。

2.3.5 结果分析

(1)操作性检验结果

首先对“遥远星球范式”所形成的热情和能力印象进行操作性检验, 分别计算出初次接触时热情和能力维度的特质评价均值, 其中, 高热情(M = 5.82, SD = 1.13); 低热情(M = 2.40, SD = 1.37); 高能力(M = 5.82, SD = 1.10); 低热情(M = 3.07, SD = 1.31)。然后, 分别跟7分等级评价的中值4进行独立样本t检验, 结果发现, 均与中值存在显著差异(ps < 0.001), 表明“遥远星球范式”操作刻板印象内容有效。

(2)描述性统计结果

合作情境中, 对不同刻板印象内容的外群体成员(高热情、低热情、高能力、低能力)在4种不同情境阶段(初次接触、得知意图、任务成功、任务失败), 人们对外群体的热情和能力感知的描述性结果如表2所示。

表2   合作情境中人们对不同刻板印象内容外群体4种阶段的热情和能力感知[M (SD)]

情境 高热情 低热情 高能力 低能力
热情 能力 热情 能力 热情 能力 热情 能力
初次接触 5.83 (1.13) 5.22 (1.04) 2.40 (1.37) 4.15 (1.39) 4.31 (1.22) 5.82 (1.10) 4.62 (1.33) 3.07 (1.31)
得知意图 5.66 (1.14) 5.42 (.97) 3.05 (1.36) 4.48 (1.37) 4.61 (1.16) 5.42 (.97) 3.05 (1.36) 3.89 (1.34)
任务成功 5.96 (1.11) 5.75 (1.04) 3.89 (1.38) 4.92 (1.25) 5.22 (1.13) 5.94 (1.07) 5.12 (1.18) 4.47 (1.21)
任务失败 5.08 (1.25) 4.68 (1.09) 2.63 (1.47) 3.92 (1.48) 3.95 (1.30) 5.23 (1.14) 3.97 (1.48) 3.29 (1.44)

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


(3) 4种不同情境阶段对不同刻板印象内容外群体的热情和能力评价

针对被试的评分数据进行4(情境)×4(评价对象)×2(评价维度)的三因素组内设计, 结果见图2, 可见三因素交互作用显著, F(9,1368) = 62.62, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.29。其余的主效应与二项交互均显著(p < 0.001)。同实验1结果分析, 分别考察成功和失败的情境变化的偏交互作用。

图2

图2   合作情境中4种不同阶段对不同刻板印象内容外群体的热情和能力评价


在“成功”情况下(忽略“失败”水平), 三因素交互显著, F(6,147) = 41.42, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.63。同样, 为考察能力热情评价随情境不断变化而发生的变化, 将情境视为具有一定连续性的变量, 采用趋势效应分析考察线性变化趋势受到维度以及评价对象的调节作用。

首先, 情境的总体线性趋势非常显著, F(1,152) = 261.94, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.63, 总体二次线性趋势同样非常显著, F(1,152) = 102.07, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.40。换言之, 仅考虑情境的趋势时, 总体呈一次线性变化, 从初次见面、得知竞争意图至成功, 在不考虑评价维度和对象时, 被试的评分存在整体逐步上升的趋势; 另一方面, 这一逐步上升的趋势内部还存在显著的二次线性趋势, 即逐步上升的过程总体上存在是先下降后上升的趋势。

在此基础上, 进一步考察维度与对象可能存在的调节作用。针对一次线性趋势进行分析, 可见三因素交互显著, F(3,150) = 46.23, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.48, 即评分随情境而变化的线性趋势显著地受到评价维度与评价对象的调节。从评价对象的角度考察简单交互效应, 可见在评价四类对象时简单交互效应均显著, 但模式存在差异(ps < 0.001)。在评价高热情对象时, 随着情境变化, 无论能力[F(1,150) = 47.50, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.24]还是热情维度[F(1,150) = 4.12, p < 0.05, ηp2 = 0.03]均呈现显著线性上升的趋势, 且在能力维度上上升的程度更大; 在评价低热情对象时, 热情[F(1,150) = 172.75, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.53]还是能力维度[F(1,150) = 66.26, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.30]均呈现显著线性上升的趋势, 且在热情维度上上升的程度更大; 在评价高能力对象时, 热情[F(1,150) = 78.859, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.342]还是能力维度[F(1,150) = 6.227, p = 0.014, ηp2 = 0.039]均呈现显著线性上升的趋势, 且在热情维度上上升的程度更大; 在评价低能力对象时, 热情[F(1,150) = 31.89, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.17]与能力维度[F(1,150) = 194.60, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.56]均呈现显著线性上升的趋势, 且在能力维度上上升的程度更大。总体而言, 可见随着合作情境的变化, 被试对外群体成员的评价是总体呈线性上升的, 但是在不同对象与不同维度中, 这一上升的幅度存在差异; 具体而言, 面对高热情和低能力的对象, 能力上升的幅度大于热情, 而在低热情和高能力对象中, 热情上升的幅度大于能力。表现出明显的互补倾向。

将情境视为二次线性趋势的三因素交互作用显著, F(3,150) = 262.93, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.84. 针对显著的三因素交互, 从评价对象的角度可见低热情对象上维度与情境的简单交互不显著, F(1,152) = 0.18, p = 0.67, ηp2 = 0.001, 即在评价低热情对象时无论热情还是能力维度上均未表现出二次线性趋势; 其余三类对象上简单交互均显著(ps < 0.05)。进一步分析高热情对象中显著的简单交互, 发现能力维度上二次线性趋势不显著[F(1,152) = 1.75, p = 0.19, ηp2 = 0.01], 热情维度上则表现出显著的先下降后上升趋势[F(1,152) = 21.43, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.12]。在高能力对象上, 可见能力[F(1,152) = 27.17, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.15]与热情维度上[F(1,152) = 7.07, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.04]先下降后上升的趋势均显著, 但是这一趋势在能力维度上表现更为突出; 在低能力对象上, 热情维度上表现出非常显著的先下降再上升的趋势[F(1,152) = 181.51, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.54], 但是在能力维度上二次趋势效应仅达到边缘显著[F(1,152) = 3.76, p = 0.05, ηp2 = 0.02]。

在“失败”情况下(忽略“成功”水平), 三因素交互显著, F(6,147) = 40.01, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.62. 为考察能力热情评价随情境不断变化而发生的变化, 将情境视为具有一定连续性的变量, 因而采用趋势效应分析, 分别检验情境变化对评价的一次和二次效应, 以便考察这一线性变化趋势受到维度以及评价对象的调节作用。首先可见情境的一次线性趋势效应显著, F(1,152) = 49.39, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.25, 而二次线性趋势的效应显著, F(1,152) = 22.02, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.13。进一步分析发现情境的一次线性趋势与评价对象、维度的三因素交互作用显著, F(3,150) = 17.01, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.25。针对显著的三因素交互, 从评价对象的角度考察, 可见在面对高热情的对象时, 情境与维度的简单交互效应仅达到边缘显著 (p = 0.07); 除此之外, 低热情、高能力、低能力对象的简单交互均显著(ps < 0.001)。具体而言, 面对低热情对象时, 随着情境变化, 被试对对象的能力评价逐渐下降[F(1,152) = 6.64, p = 0.01, ηp2 = 0.04], 而热情逐渐上升[F(1,152) = 8.21, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.05], 两者一次线性趋势均显著; 对于高能力对象,能力[F(1,152) = 53.83, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.262]与热情维度上[F(1,152) = 17.18, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.102]均表现出随情境变化显著下降的趋势, 但能力维度上的趋势更强; 对于低能力对象, 能力上出现显著上升[F(1,152) = 5.46, p = 0.02, ηp2 = 0.04], 而热情上表现出显著下降的趋势[F(1,152) = 45.41, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.23]。

值得注意的是, 由于得知合作意图与合作失败两个情境之间的反差较大, 被试的评价可能出现反转, 一次线性趋势无法充分描述这一变化。因此, 进一步考察二次线性趋势。将情境视为二次线性趋势的三因素交互作用显著, F(3,150) = 215.38, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.81。针对显著的三因素交互, 从评价对象的角度考察, 可见当评价低热情外群体时, 情境与维度的简单交互作用不显著(p = 0.21), 其余三类对象的简单交互均显著(ps < 0.001)。在评价高热情对象时, 可见能力[F(1,152) = 60.30, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.28]与热情维度上[F(1,152) = 11.85, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.07]均表现出先上升后下降的显著二次线性趋势, 能力上的趋势变化更突出; 对于高能力对象, 能力维度上的变化不显著(p = 0.29), 而热情维度上呈现明显的先上升后下降的趋势[F(1,152) = 52.19, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.26]; 面对低能力对象, 能力维度上呈现显著的先上升后下降趋势[F(1,152) = 80.96, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.35], 而热情维度上表现出显著的先下降后上升趋势[F(1,152) = 77.14, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.34]。

2.3.6 讨论

从对不同刻板印象内容的外群体成员在合作的4种不同情境的热情和能力评价趋势图(见图2)可以看出, 在评价意图阶段, 即在告知将要与外群体合作的阶段, 与竞争情境相同, 人们对于高热情、低能力的外群体均表现出热情下降、能力上升的评价; 同样与竞争情境相同, 对于低热情的外群体表现出热情和能力均上升的评价, 而与竞争情境不同, 对高能力的外群体表现出热情上升、能力下降的评价。而在评价结果阶段, 即在想象与外群体合作结果成功和失败后的评价, 与竞争成功情境不同, 在合作成功阶段, 对于高热情、低热情、高能力和低能力的外群体均表现出热情和能力均上升的趋势; 而同样与竞争失败不同, 在合作失败阶段, 对于高热情、低热情、高能力和低能力的外群体均表现出热情和能力均下降的趋势。

3 研究2:基于热情与能力双维信息呈现的视角

3.1 研究目的与假设

研究1主要基于单维视角, 将刻板印象内容的热情和能力维度在外群体成员的描述中单一呈现独立进行了考察, 外群体另一维度的情形是一种推断。在此基础上, 研究2基于双维视角即同时将热情和能力维度进行组合描述, 考察刻板印象内容的两维对竞争与合作行为的影响, 进一步对研究的主要发现进行重复检验。研究假设:基于双维视角与单维视角结果类似, 即(1)在行动前的评价意图阶段, 对外群体的热情和能力两维度评价会表现出“趋中”平衡的趋势。(2)在竞争情境, 当与外群体成员竞争成功时, 会在两维度上降低对外群体能力的评价; 当竞争失败时会提升对其能力评价; 在合作情境, 当与外群体合作成功时, 对外群体两维度上评价会同时上升; 而在合作失败时, 会同时降低对其热情和能力的评价。

3.2 实验3:竞争情境

实验3与实验1的不同之处是在“遥远星球范式”中对外群体成员的描述是热情和能力的组合。同样采用组内设计, 对竞争情境下人们对不同刻板印象内容(高热情高能力、高热情低能力、低热情高能力和低热情低能力)的外群体成员分别在4种情境(初次接触、得知竞争意图、竞争成功、竞争失败)中的热情和能力评价的演变趋势加以检验。

3.2.1 被试

武汉某高校本科生118名, 其中男生37人, 女生81人, 平均年龄为22.27岁, 标准差为3.64岁。

3.2.2 实验设计

与实验1和实验3设计相同, 不同的是对外群体成员的描述为热情和能力的双维组合, 即高热情高能力、低热情高能力、高热情低能力、低热情低能力。

3.2.3 实验材料

与实验1的不同体现在对“遥远星球范式”变式中虚拟的4个外星球群体的描述, 从热情和能力的单一维度, 变成了热情和能力的双维组合描述, 如“高EQ高IQ”的“Wahrn”群体, “低EQ高IQ”的“Lsejt”群体, “低EQ低IQ”的“ Morlc”群体和“高EQ低IQ”的“Zaufs”群体。

3.2.4 实验程序

实验3的程序与实验1基本相同, 对描述中热情和能力的呈现顺序进行了平衡。

3.2.5 结果分析

(1)操作性检验结果

首先对“遥远星球范式”所形成的热情和能力印象进行操作性检验, 分别计算出初次接触的热情和能力维度的特质评价均值, 其中, 高热情高能力组合(M高热情 = 5.50, SD = 1.35; M高能力 = 6.04, SD = 1.12); 低热情高能力组合(M低热情 = 2.32, SD = 1.29; M高能力 = 5.69, SD = 1.27); 低热情低能力组合(M低热情 = 2.63, SD = 1.59; M低能力 = 2.86, SD = 1.54); 高热情低能力组合(M高热情 = 5.78, SD = 1.20; M高能力 = 3.29, SD = 1.46)。然后, 分别与7分等级评价的中值4进行独立样本t检验, 结果发现, 均与中值存在显著差异(ps < 0.001), 表明“遥远星球范式”操作刻板印象内容有效。

(2)描述性统计结果

竞争情境中, 对不同刻板印象内容的外群体成员(高热情、低热情、高能力、低能力)在4种不同情境阶段(初次接触、得知意图、任务成功、任务失败), 人们对外群体的热情和能力感知的描述性结果如表3所示。

表3   竞争情境中人们对不同刻板印象内容外群体4种阶段的热情和能力感知[M (SD)]

情境 高热情-高能力 低热情-高能力 高热情-低能力 低热情-低能力
热情 能力 热情 能力 热情 能力 热情 能力
初次接触 5.50 (1.35) 6.04 (1.12) 2.32 (1.29) 5.69 (1.27) 5.78 (1.20) 3.29 (1.46) 2.62 (1.59) 2.86 (1.54)
得知意图 4.86 (1.61) 5.89 (1.11) 2.54 (1.34) 5.58 (1.32) 5.17 (1.37) 3.55 (1.38) 2.73 (1.51) 3.22 (1.59)
任务成功 5.10 (1.46) 5.09 (1.52) 2.78 (1.41) 4.56 (1.50) 5.07 (1.42) 2.67 (1.54) 2.77 (1.61) 2.67 (1.54)
任务失败 4.61 (1.75) 5.91 (1.28) 2.46 (1.41) 5.53 (1.58) 4.61 (1.69) 4.42 (1.55) 2.64 (1.60) 4.12 (1.67)

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


(3) 4种不同竞争情境阶段对对不同刻板印象内容外群体的热情和能力评价

针对被试的评分数据进行4(情境)×4(评价对象)×2(评价维度)的三因素组内设计, 结果如图3, 可见三因素交互作用显著, F(9,1053) = 22.65, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.16。其余的主效应与二项交互均显著(p < 0.001)。同实验1结果分析, 分别考察成功和失败的情境变化的偏交互作用。

图3

图3   竞争情境中不同阶段对不同刻板印象内容外群体的热情和能力评价


在“成功”情况下(忽略“失败”水平), 三因素交互显著, F(6,112) = 12.16, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.40。为考察能力热情评价随情境不断变化而发生的变化, 将情境视为具有一定连续性的变量, 因而采用趋势效应分析, 分别检验情境变化对评价的一次和二次效应, 以便考察这一线性变化趋势受到维度以及评价对象的调节作用。首先可见情境的一次线性趋势主效应显著, F(1,117) = 42.87, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.27, 而二次线性趋势的主效应也显著, F(1,117) = 13.76, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.11, 可见一方面存在随着竞争的开展直至结束, 被试对外群体成员无论在能力还是热情维度上均总体上表现出下降的趋势, 另一方面也存在着一定程度的二次线性趋势, 即评价先上升后下降, 或者先下降后上升。

与假设相符, 情境的一次线性趋势显著地受到评价对象与维度的调节, 三因素交互显著, F(3,115) = 16.09, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.30。针对显著的三因素交互, 从评价对象的角度考察, 可见仅当评价高热情低能力外群体时, 简单交互作用不显著, F(1,117) = 0.213, p = 0.65, ηp2 = 0.002, 其余三类对象的简单交互均显著(p < 0.05)。进一步从维度的角度考察情境的简单简单效应可见:对于高热情高能力外群体, 热情评价与能力评价均逐渐显著降低(ps < 0.001), 但是能力维度上降低的程度更大(热情维度与能力维度相比:-0.40 vs. -0.95), 且在能力维度上一次线性假设可以解释更大的方差比例(ηp2 = 0.08 vs. 0.29); 对于低热情高能力对象, 热情维度上评分显著上升(p < 0.001), 而能力维度上评分显著下降(p < 0.001), 相对而言, 能力维度上一次线性假设可以解释更大的方差比例(ηp2 = 0.12 vs.0.35); 对于低能力低热情的评价对象, 虽然简单交互作用显著, 但从维度的角度考察发现, 无论在热情维度上还是在能力维度上情境的一次线性作用均不显著(ps > 0.09), 这暗示可能存在二次线性作用。

鉴于在显著的简单交互作用情况下, 出现多个一次线性趋势的简单简单效应解释方差比率不高或不显著的现象, 进一步考察可能存在的二次线性作用。可见将情境视为二次线性趋势的三因素交互作用同样显著, 将情境视为二次线性趋势的三因素交互作用显著, F(3,115) = 204.98, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.84。针对显著的三因素交互, 从评价对象的角度考察, 可见四种情况下评价维度与情境的简单交互均显著, 因此分别加以考查。以评价对象视角出发考察, 发现在评价四类对象的情况下, 情境与维度的简单交互均显著(ps < 0.001), 只是在效应量上存在差异。对于高热情高能力的对象, 能力[F(1,117) = 20.03, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.15]和热情维度上[F(1,117) = 27.14, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.19]二次线性趋势都显著, 但是两者的方向相反(0.87 vs. -0.66), 即在热情维度上呈现先下降后上升趋势, 而能力维度上呈现先上升后下降趋势。对于低热情高能力对象, 热情维度上不显著[F(1,117) = 0.001, p = 0.98], 仅能力维度上二次线性显著[F(1,117) = 21.77, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.16], 具体呈现先上升后下降趋势。对于高热情低能力的对象, 热情[F(1,117) = 11.91, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.09]与能力维度上[F(1,117) = 34.57, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.23]二次线性趋势均显著, 但方向不同(0.51 vs. -1.13)。在热情维度上呈现先下降后上升的趋势, 而在能力上呈现出先上升后下降的趋势。对于低热情低能力的对象, 热情评分上不显著[F(1,117) = 0.39, p = 0.53], 仅在能力评分上出现二次线性趋势[F(1,117) = 28.02, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.19], 表现出先上升后下降的趋势。

在“失败”情况下(忽略“成功”水平), 三因素交互显著, F(6,112) = 20.11, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.52。为考察能力热情评价随情境不断变化而发生的变化, 将情境视为具有一定连续性的变量, 因而采用趋势效应分析, 分别检验情境变化对评价的一次和二次效应, 以便考察这一线性变化趋势受到维度以及评价对象的调节作用。首先可见情境的一次线性趋势效应不显著, F(1,117) = 0.14, p = 0.71, 而二次线性趋势的效应显著, F(1,117) = 5.56, p = 0.02, ηp2 = 0.05。

然而, 虽然情境一次线性趋势的主效应不显著, 但这一不显著的结果可能与交互作用有关, 进一步分析确实发现情境的一次线性趋势与评价对象、维度的三因素交互作用显著, F(3,115) = 24.10, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.39。针对显著的三因素交互, 从评价对象的角度考察, 可见在评价低热情-高能力对象时情境与维度的简单交互仅达到边缘显著(p = 0.07), 评价另外三类对象时简单交互作用均非常显著(ps < 0.001)。当评价高热情高能力的对象时, 热情维度上的线性趋势非常显著, F(1,117) = 41.71, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.26, 随着竞争情境的发展, 被试对对象的热情评价逐渐下降, 在能力维度上评分则仅达到边缘显著, F(1,117) = 2.76, p < 0.10, ηp2 = 0.02, 同样呈现下降趋势。在评价高热情低能力对象时, 两维度上的线性趋势均显著(ps < 0.001), 但是方向相反, 热情维度逐渐下降, 但能力维度评分逐渐上升。最后, 在评价低热情低能力对象时, 热情维度上评分变化不显著(p = 0.88), 能力维度上呈现显著的线性提升趋势, F(1,117) = 63.81, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.35.

将情境视为二次线性趋势的三因素交互作用显著, F(3,115) = 240.35, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.86。针对显著的三因素交互, 从评价对象的角度考察, 可见当评价高热情低能力外群体[F(1,117) = 6.60, p = 0.01, ηp2 = 0.05]和低热情低能力外群体时[F(1,117) = 12.94, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.10], 简单交互效应显著, 评价其余两类对象时情境与维度的简单交互效应不显著(ps > 0.05)。因此分别考察高热情低能力与低热情低能力外群体对象。在评价高热情低能力对象时, 可见热情维度上变化不显著(p = 0.76), 而能力上二次线性趋势非常显著, F(1,117) = 15.83, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.12, 呈现出先下降后上升的趋势。评价低热情低能力对象时, 同样发现热情维度上变化不显著(p = 0.13), 能力上呈现显著的先下降后上升的趋势, F(1,117) = 7.93, p < 0.05, ηp2 = 0.06。

3.2.6 讨论

基于双维信息呈现的视角, 对不同刻板印象内容的外群体成员在竞争的4种不同情境的热情和能力评价趋势可以看出, 在评价意图阶段, 即在告知将要与外群体竞争的阶段, 人们对于高热情-高能力、低热情-低能力的外群体均表现出相似的热情和能力同向变化趋势, 即对高热情-高能力外群体的评价表现出热情和能力均下降趋势, 而对低热情-低能力的评价表现出热情和能力均上升趋势; 而人们对于低热情-高能力、高热情-低能力的外群体均表现出热情和能力反向的变化趋势, 即对低热情-高能力表现出热情上升、能力下降趋势, 对高热情-低能力则表现出热情下降、能力上升的趋势。在评价结果阶段, 即在想象与外群体竞争结果成功和失败后的评价, 与单维信息呈现结果类似, 在竞争成功阶段, 对于高热情-高能力、低热情-低能力、低热情-高能力和低能力的外群体均表现出热情上升, 能力下降的趋势, 除了对于高热情-低能力的外群体的热情下降外; 而在竞争失败阶段, 对于高热情-高能力、低热情-高能力、高热情-低能力和低热情-低能力的外群体均表现出热情下降, 能力上升的趋势。

3.3 实验4:合作情境

与实验3不同, 实验4旨在探讨合作情境下, 人们对不同刻板印象内容(高能力-高能力、低热情-高能力、高热情-低能力、低热情-低能力)的外群体成员, 分别在初次接触、得知合作意图、合作成功、合作失败4种不同情境中的热情和能力评价演变趋势。

3.3.1 被试

武汉某高校本科生128名, 其中男生48人, 女生80人, 平均年龄为21.60岁, 标准差为1.83岁。

3.3.2 实验设计

采用与实验3相同的实验设计, 因变量为4种不同情境阶段(初次接触、得知合作意图、合作成功、合作失败), 对外群体成员的热情和能力评价 得分。

3.3.3 实验材料

与实验3的材料相同, 所不同的是竞争情境换成了合作情境。

3.3.4 实验程序

实验4的程序与实验3基本相同。

3.3.5 结果分析

(1)操作性检验结果

首先对“遥远星球范式”所形成的热情和能力印象进行操作性检验, 分别计算出初次接触的热情和能力维度的特质评价均值, 其中, 高热情高能力组合(M高热情 = 5.53, SD = 1.48; M高能力 = 5.85, SD = 1.30); 低热情高能力组合(M低热情 = 2.51, SD = 1.47; M高能力 = 5.51, SD = 1.29); 低热情低能力组合(M低热情 = 2.82, SD = 1.59; M低能力 = 2.83, SD = 1.45); 高热情低能力组合(M高热情 = 5.68, SD = 1.19; M高能力 = 3.36, SD = 1.46)。然后, 分别与7分等级评价的中值4进行独立样本t检验, 结果发现, 均与中值存在显著差异(ps < 0.001), 表明“遥远星球范式”操作刻板印象内容有效。

(2)描述性统计结果

合作情境中, 对不同刻板印象内容的外群体成员(高热情、低热情、高能力、低能力)在4种不同情境阶段(初次接触、得知意图、任务成功、任务失败), 人们对外群体的热情和能力感知的描述性结果如表4所示。

表4   合作情境中人们对不同刻板印象内容外群体4种阶段的热情和能力感知[M (SD)]

情境 高热情-高能力 低热情-高能力 高热情-低能力 低热情-低能力
热情 能力 热情 能力 热情 能力 热情 能力
初次接触 5.53 (1.48) 5.85 (1.30) 2.51 (1.47) 5.51 (1.29) 5.68 (1.19) 3.36 (1.46) 2.82 (1.59) 2.83 (1.45)
得知意图 5.45 (1.46) 5.88 (1.15) 3.16 (1.47) 5.52 (1.22) 5.46 (1.34) 3.86 (1.46) 3.29 (1.48) 3.41 (1.37)
任务成功 5.72 (1.43) 6.01 (1.26) 3.86 (1.53) 5.80 (1.23) 5.76 (1.24) 4.41 (1.32) 3.90 (1.52) 4.06 (1.44)
任务失败 4.73 (1.57) 5.13 (1.34) 2.78 (1.59) 4.75 (1.42) 5.00 (1.55) 3.33 (1.53) 2.70 (1.59) 2.84 (1.60)

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


(3) 4种不同合作情境阶段对对不同刻板印象内容外群体的热情和能力评价

针对被试的评分数据进行4(情境)×4(评价对象)×2(评价维度)的三因素组内设计, 结果如图4, 可见三因素交互作用显著, F(9,1143) = 22.48, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.15。另外, 除情景与维度的二项交互不显著之外(p = 0.32), 其余的主效应与二项交互均显著(p < 0.001)。同实验1结果分析, 分别考察成功和失败的情境变化的偏交互作用。

图4

图4   合作不同情境阶段对不同刻板印象内容外群体的热情和能力评价


在“成功”情况下(忽略“失败”水平), 三因素交互显著, F(6,122) = 15.86, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.44。为考察能力热情评价随情境不断变化而发生的变化, 将情境视为具有一定连续性的变量, 因而采用趋势效应分析, 以便考察这一线性变化趋势受到维度以及评价对象的调节作用。

首先, 情境的总体线性趋势非常显著, F(1,127) = 138.94, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.52, 二次线性趋势也显著, 但效应相对较弱, F(1,127) = 11.39, p = 0.001, ηp2 = 0.082。采用一次线性进行分析, 可见三因素交互显著, F(3,125) = 27.90, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.40, 即评分随情境而变化的线性趋势显著地受到评价维度与评价对象的调节。从评价对象的角度考察简单交互作用, 可见仅当评价低热情-高能力(F(1,127) = 53.75, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.30)和高热情-低能力对象(F(1, 127) = 59.64, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.32)时, 简单交互作用显著, 在评价高热情-高能力(F(1,127) = 0.14,p = 0.71)以及低热情-低能力条件(F(1,127) = 2.01, p = 0.16)时则不显著。进一步分别考察简单交互效应。当评价低热情-高能力对象时, 可见无论热情[F(1,127) = 97.24, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.43]还是能力维度[F(1,127) = 15.63, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.11]上, 线性趋势均显著, 只是情境的线性效应强度存在显著差异, 热情维度上随着合作的开展至成功, 热情评分有较明显地线性提升趋势, 而在能力维度上的变化则较为平缓。当评价高热情-低能力的对象时, 仅在能力维度上显著[F(1,127) = 83.71, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.40], 热情维度上不显著 [F(1,127) = 1.28, p = 0.26], 即在合作过程中人们对高热情-低能力对象的能力评分呈现明显的线性上升的趋势, 而在热情维度上合作的不同阶段的作用不显著。

在“失败”情况下(忽略“成功”水平), 三因素交互显著, F(6,122) = 16.06, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.44。为考察能力热情评价随情境不断变化而发生的变化, 将情境视为具有一定连续性的变量, 因而采用趋势效应分析, 以便考察这一线性变化趋势受到维度以及评价对象的调节作用。

首先, 情境的总体线性趋势显著, F(1,127) = 31.424, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.20, 二次线性趋势也显著, 且效应相对较强, F(1,127) = 66.78, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.35。因此主要考查二次线性趋势。采用二次线性进行分析, 可见三因素交互显著, F(3,125) = 285.96, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.87, 即评分随情境而变化的二次线性趋势显著地受到评价维度与评价对象的调节。进一步从评价对象的视角考察是否存在简单交互效应, 结果可见仅在评价高热情低能力外群体时, 维度与情境存在简单交互效应, F(1,127) = 18.50, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.13, 换言之, 评价其他三类外群体对象时, 无论是能力还是热情维度, 被试的评价均随合作的推进而展现出先上升后下降的趋势。针对评价高热情、低能力外群体时展现出的显著简单交互效应。进一步考察简单简单效应, 结果发现热情维度上被试评价随合作情境变化而展现出的二次线性趋势仅达到边缘显著, F(1,127) = 3.28, p = 0.07, ηp2 = 0.03, 而在能力维度上, 这一二次线性趋势非常显著, F(1,127) = 50.69, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.29。

3.3.6 讨论

基于双维信息呈现的视角, 对不同刻板印象内容的外群体成员在合作的4种不同情境的热情和能力评价趋势可以看出, 在评价意图阶段, 即在告知将要与外群体合作的阶段, 人们对于高热情-高能力、高热情-低能力的外群体均表现出热情和能力均上升的评价。在评价结果阶段, 即在想象与外群体合作结果成功和失败后的评价, 与单维结果一致, 在合作成功阶段, 对于高热情-高能力、低热情-高能力、高热情-低能力和低热情-低能力的外群体均表现出热情和能力均上升的趋势; 而同样与竞争失败不同, 在合作失败阶段, 对于高热情-高能力、低热情-高能力、高热情-低能力和低热情-低能力的外群体均表现出热情和能力均下降的趋势。

4 总体讨论

4.1 群际评价中热情与能力之间的正向与负向关系

将研究1(单维信息呈现)和研究2(双维信息呈现)的结果进行归纳(表5所示), 可以看出, 研究1中单维的结果与研究2双维的结果表现出相似性。具体来看, 人们对单维高热情外群体的评价, 与双维高热情-高能力外群体的评价类似; 对低热情外群体的评价, 与低热情-低能力外群体的评价类似; 对高能力的评价, 与高能力-低热情类似; 对低能力的评价, 与低能力-高热情的评价类似。这一发现为热情和能力之间的关系提供了新的视角。以往有研究者表明, 热情和能力之间存在如晕轮效应的正向关系, 当一个行为或特质词在热情和能力的一个维度上得分较高时, 在另一维度上的得分也高(Yzerbyt, Kervyn, & Judd, 2008; Holoien & Fiske, 2013); 也有研究者表明, 热情和能力之间存在负向关系, 如补偿效应, 即当知觉者察觉到两个社会目标在一个维度上存在差异时, 会在另一维度上进行相反方向的补偿, 从而使两个社会目标形成反差(Kervyn et al., 2009; Kervyn et al., 2011; 佐斌等, 2014)。本研究中, 高热情与高热情-高能力相一致的结果, 低热情与低热情-低能力相一致的结果, 表明对于热情维度而言, 由已知的热情推断能力时, 的确存在晕轮效应的正向关系; 而从高能力与高能力-低热情相一致的结果, 低能力与低能力-高热情相一致的结果, 则表明对于能力维度, 由已知的能力推断热情时, 则存在类似补偿效应的负向关系。这一发现为热情与能力之间的关系探讨提供了新的方向和证据。

表5   单维与双维视角下对不同刻板印象内容外群体4种阶段的热情和能力感知动态演变

情境 高热情 高热情-高能力 低热情 低热情-低能力 高能力 高能力-低热情 低能力 低能力-高热情
W/C W/C W/C W/C W/C W/C W/C W/C
评价
意图
竞争 ¯­ ¯¯ ­­ ­­ ¯¯ ­¯ ¯­ ¯­
合作 ¯­ ¯­ ­­ ­­ ­¯ ­­ ¯­ ¯­
评价
结果
竞争成功 ­¯ ­¯ ­¯ ­¯ ­¯ ­¯ ­¯ ¯¯
竞争失败 ¯­ ¯­ ¯­ ¯­ ¯­ ¯­ ¯­ ¯­
合作成功 ­­ ­­ ­­ ­­ ­­ ­­ ­­ ­­
合作失败 ¯¯ ¯¯ ¯¯ ¯¯ ¯¯ ¯¯ ¯¯ ¯¯

注:W/C表示热情/能力; ­表示上升, ¯表示下降。

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


4.2 评价意图对群际评价中热情与能力感知演变的影响

研究表明, 当被试被告知将与不同热情与能力的外群体进行竞争或合作时, 即被试得知评价意图时, 其表现出的对外群体的感知也表现出了一定的规律(表5)。具体来看, 对于低热情、低热情-低能力的外群体评价表现出热情和能力均升高的趋势; 对于低能力、低能力-高热情的外群体评价表现出热情下降、能力升高的趋势; 对于高热情、高热情-高能力外群体表现出热情下降, 能力总体上升的趋势; 对于高能力、高能力-低热情外群体表现出热情总体上升, 能力总体下降的趋势。总体可以归纳出, 在得知外群体的意图阶段, 无论是竞争还是合作, 人们均朝与外群体热情与能力先前感知相反的方向变化(除对高热情、高能力-高热情合作时的能力评价外, 进一步由均值发现虽然表现的是上升趋势, 但差异不明显), 即如果外群体之前的感知是高热情或低能力, 则在感知其互动意图时, 会对其热情判断降低或能力判断升高, 表现出“趋中”平衡的趋势。这一在得知外群体意图的热情与能力评价, 与合作与竞争的情境无关, 总体均表现出热情与能力评价“趋中”平衡的结果, 符合热情与能力的两维度认知的进化适应生存的心理机制, 如Fiske, Cuddy, Glick和Xu (2002)认为:“当社会性动物遭遇到同种个体时, 首先必须做出他人是朋友还是敌人的意图判断, 然后再做出他人是否有能力实现其意图的判断, 即热情和能力两维度的判断” (佐斌等, 2015), 那么, 在被试得知要与外群体成员进行互动时, 被试无意识地做出防御的姿态, 降低了对高热情外群体热情评价, 提升了对低能力外群体的能力评价, 有助于人们不被高热情外群体的友好意图蒙蔽, 也不会被低能力外群体而放松威胁的警惕; 同时也符合适应互动的心理, 提升对低热情外群体热情评价, 有助于减少群体间的敌意, 从而更好进行群际互动。

4.3 成败结果对群际评价中热情与能力感知演变的影响

研究1和研究2的单维和双维视角均发现, 成败结果对热情与能力感知演变的影响, 会受到情境的制约。从表5可以看出, 在竞争成功时, 人们对所有的外群体成员评价均表现出热情上升、能力下降的趋势, 即热情和能力的反向变化, 除对低能力-高热情的热情评价下降外; 在竞争失败时, 人们对所有的外群体成员评价则均表现出热情下降、能力上升的趋势, 也是热情和能力的反向变化趋势。而在合作成功时, 人们对所有的外群体成员评价均表现出热情和能力均上升的趋势, 即热情和能力的同向变化; 在合作失败时, 人们对所有外群体成员评价则表现出热情和能力均下降的趋势, 也呈现出热情和能力的同向变化趋势。这一结果与前文所 提及的热情与能力的本体论和功能论的解释相符(Abele et al., 2014), 即基于功能实用的角度, 行动后结果对人们评价外群体热情和能力的影响, 主要出于群际关系互动系统的良性发展的考虑, 人们在竞争与合作的成败后, 会权衡自利性和亲和性的需要, 进而对外群体的热情和能力评价从一定程度上折射出这种心理机制。

4.4 本研究的局限与展望

本研究考察了在竞争与合作的情境中人们对外群体的热情和能力评价, 行动前的评价意图阶段和行动后的成败结果阶段的演变趋势, 拓展了现有的群际关系领域的研究以及SCM模型, 具有重要的理论与现实意义。作为初步探索, 本研究还存在一些局限和不足, 值得未来研究进一步探讨和完善:首先, 本研究采用“遥远星球范式”虚拟出高低热情能力的外群体, 这种方法能够排除对真实群体的先前信念的混淆从而做出更好的因果关系检验(Cuddy, Fiske, & Glick, 2007), 操作性检验也验证了该范式的有效性。不过, 应当认识到, 虚拟群体范式存在独特优势的同时也体现一定的局限性, 比如生态效度可能受到影响。未来研究需要选取更多高低热情和能力以及不同组合的真实群体, 在现实的合作与竞争情境中进行检验。其次, 本研究主要聚焦于合作与竞争情境, 探讨了热情与能力相互推断的关系以及热情与能力感知在行动前和行动后对情境依赖的差异性和规律, 对此发现也有待于在其它情境中进行重复检验, 例如在与热情相匹配的社交情境(如旅游等), 在与能力相匹配的工作情境(如学术讨论等)。同时, 根据群际情绪-刻板印象-行为趋向系统模型(Behaviors from Intergroup Affect and Stereotypes Map, BIAS Map), 情绪在群际评价中发挥着重要作用(Bye & Herrebrøden, 2017), 考察在不同情境中人们对外群体的情绪反应所起的作用也是今后应该探讨的一个重要问题。最后, 值得思考的是, 本研究发现的竞争情境下“此消彼长”和合作情境中“同消同长”的现象是刻板印象内容模型的必然衍生品, 还是在中国文化的独特心理模式中建构的内容呢?对这一问题的探究将成为未来研究的重要方向。在中国注重长期和谐关系的文化背景下, 通过“德才兼备” (这里的“德”相当于“热情”, “才”相当于“能力”)进行社会认知的人际评价是普遍现象, 那么, 是否存在合作情境中的“同消同长”模式呢?将竞争情境下的“此消彼长”和合作情境中的“同消同长”现象同中国文化心理学的内容相结合, 进行跨文化比较研究, 更深入揭示群际评价中热情与能力情境演变的内在文化根基, 是未来研究的重要目标。

5 结论

(1)基于单维和双维信息呈现双重视角的研究显示, 高热情与高热情-高能力、低热情与低热情-低能力分别相一致的结果, 表明由已知的热情推断能力时存在类似晕轮效应的正向关系; 而从高能力与高能力-低热情、低能力与低能力-高热情相一致的结果, 表明由已知的能力推断热情时存在补偿效应的负向关系。

(2)评价意图对外群体成员的热情和能力评价的影响与具体情境无关。总体而言, 人们对外群体成员的热情和能力评价在得知互动意图时均呈现出“趋中”平衡的趋势, 符合热情与能力的进化适应生存的心理机制。

(3)成败结果对外群体成员热情和能力评价的影响受到情境的制约。在竞争情境中, 热情和能力评价表现出“此消彼长”的反向演变趋势; 在合作情境中, 热情和能力评价表现出“同消同长”的同向演变趋势。

参考文献

Abele A. E., Bruckmüller S., & Wojciszke B . ( 2014).

You are so kind-and I am kind and smart: Actor-observer differences in the interpretation of on-going behavior

Polish Psychological Bulletin, 45( 4), 394-401.

[本文引用: 4]

Abele A. E., Hauke N., Peters K., Louvet E., Szymkow A., & Duan Y . ( 2016).

Facets of the fundamental content dimensions: agency with competence and assertiveness— communion with warmth and morality

Frontiers in Psychology,7, 1810.

[本文引用: 1]

Asch S.E . ( 1946).

Forming impression of personality

Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41( 3), 258-290.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Bakan D .( 1966).

The duality of human existence: an essay on psychology and religion

Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

[本文引用: 1]

Bettelheim B., & Janowitz M . ( 1950).

Dynamics of prejudice

New York: Harper

[本文引用: 1]

Bye H.H., &Herrebrøden H .( 2017).

Emotions as mediators of the stereotype-discrimination relationship: A bias map replication

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 136843021769437.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Abstract A central theoretical assumption in the Behaviors from Intergroup Affect and Stereotypes (BIAS) map framework is that emotions mediate the relationships between stereotypes and intergroup behavior. Despite the BIAS map’s popularity, very few studies have tested the model’s mediation hypotheses and none have tested them by replicating the original study (Cuddy, Fiske, & Glick, 2007, Study 1). We provide a replication in a Norwegian sample (N = 244). The results supported that stereotype content is related to behavior tendencies, mediated through emotional prejudices. However, for each of the four behavior outcomes the effect of stereotype content was mediated through one emotion rather than two as predicted by the BIAS map. Our findings both converge and diverge from those of Cuddy and colleagues, and provide support for theoretical propositions unsupported by the original study. Overall, the study provides empirical support for the BIAS map framework and its cross-cultural validity.

Cacault M. P., Goette L., Lalive R., & Thoenig M . ( 2015).

Do we harm others even if we don't need to?

Frontiers in Psychology, 6( 729), 1-9.

URL     PMID:26082737      [本文引用: 1]

Evolutionary explanations of the co-existence of large-scale cooperation and warfare in human societies rest on the hypothesis of parochial altruism, the view that in-group pro-sociality and out-group anti-sociality have co-evolved. We designed an experiment that allows subjects to freely choose between actions that are purely pro-social, purely anti-social, or a combination of the two. We present behavioral evidence on the existence of strong aggression-a pattern of non-strategic behaviors that are welfare-reducing for all individuals (i.e., victims and perpetrators). We also show how strong aggression serves to dynamically stabilize in-group pro-sociality.

Capozza D., Bernardo G. A. D., & Falvo R . ( 2017).

Intergroup contact and outgroup humanization: Is the causal relationship uni- or bidirectional?

Plos One, 12( 1), e0170554.

URL     PMID:5261613      [本文引用: 1]

The attribution of uniquely human characteristics to the outgroup may favor the search for contact with outgroup members and, vice versa, contact experiences may improve humanity attributions to the outgroup. To explore this bidirectional relationship, two studies were performed. In Study 1, humanity perceptions were manipulated using subliminal conditioning. Two experimental conditions were created. In the humanization condition, the unconditioned stimuli (US) were uniquely human words; in the dehumanization condition, the US were non-uniquely human and animal words. In both conditions, conditioned stimuli were typical outgroup faces. An approach/avoidance technique (the manikin task) was used to measure the willingness to have contact with outgroup members. Findings showed that in the humanization condition participants were faster in approaching than in avoiding outgroup members: closeness to the outgroup was preferred to distance. Latencies of approach and avoidance movements were not different in the dehumanization condition. In Study 2, contact was manipulated using the manikin task. One approach (contact) condition and two control conditions were created. The attribution of uniquely human traits to the outgroup was stronger in the contact than in the no-contact conditions. Furthermore, the effect of contact on humanity attributions was mediated by increased trust toward the outgroup. Thus, findings demonstrate the bidirectionality of the relationship between contact and humanity attributions. Practical implications of findings are discussed.

Chen Y., & Li S.X . ( 2009).

Group identity and social preferences

American Economic Review, 99( 1), 431-457.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

We present a laboratory experiment that measures the effects of induced group identity on social preferences. We find that when participants are matched with an ingroup member, they show a 47 percent increase in charity concerns and a 93 percent decrease in envy. Likewise, participants are 19 percent more likely to reward an ingroup match for good behavior, but 13 percent less likely to punish an ingroup match for misbehavior. Furthermore, participants are significantly more likely to choose social-welfare-maximizing actions when matched with an ingroup member. All results are consistent with the hypothesis that participants are more altruistic toward an ingroup match.

Cislak A., & Wojciszke B .( 2008).

Agency and communion are inferred from actions serving interests of self or others

European Journal of Social Psychology, 38( 7), 1103-1110.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Agentic qualities are associated with self-interests of the trait possessor and communal qualities are associated with interests of other people (with whom the trait possessor interacts with). Based on this idea we hypothesized that information on behavior serving self-interests leads to inferences of agency while information on identical actions performed in the service of others' interests leads to inferences of communion. These hypotheses were supported in a study where participants perceived a politician who acted for or against his own interest and (orthogonally) acted for or against interests of other people. Additionally, actions serving other-interest influenced attitudes toward the politician to a higher degree than actions serving his self-interest. The other-interest influence on attitudes was mediated by inferences of communal qualities of the politician while the self-interest influence on attitudes was mediated by inferences of agentic qualities of the politician. Copyright 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Clough P.D., & Bates J . ( 2017).

Competent men and warm women: Gender stereotypes and backlash in image search results

Computer and Human Interaction, 5, 6620-6631.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

There is much concern about algorithms that underlieinformation services and the view of the world theypresent. We develop a novel method for examining thecontent and strength of gender stereotypes in imagesearch, inspired by the trait adjective checklist method.We compare the gender distribution in photos retrieved byBing for the query “person” and for queries based on 68character traits (e.g., “intelligent person”) in four regionalmarkets. Photos of men are more often retrieved for“person,” as compared to women. As predicted, photos ofwomen are more often retrieved for warm traits (e.g.,“emotional”) whereas agentic traits (e.g., “rational”) arerepresented by photos of men. A backlash effect, wherestereotype-incongruent individuals are penalized, isobserved. However, backlash is more prevalent for“competent women” than “warm men.” Results underlinethe need to understand how and why biases enter searchalgorithms and at which stages of the engineering process

Cuddy A. J. C., Fiske S. T., & Glick P . ( 2007).

The BIAS map: behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,92( 4), 631-648.

URL     PMID:17469949      [本文引用: 1]

In the present research, consisting of 2 correlational studies (N = 616) including a representative U.S. sample and 2 experiments (N = 350), the authors investigated how stereotypes and emotions shape behavioral tendencies toward groups, offering convergent support for the behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes (BIAS) map framework. Warmth stereotypes determine active behavioral tendencies, attenuating active harm (harassing) and eliciting active facilitation (helping). Competence stereotypes determine passive behavioral tendencies, attenuating passive harm (neglecting) and eliciting passive facilitation (associating). Admired groups (warm, competent) elicit both facilitation tendencies; hated groups (cold, incompetent) elicit both harm tendencies. Envied groups (competent, cold) elicit passive facilitation but active harm; pitied groups (warm, incompetent) elicit active facilitation but passive harm. Emotions predict behavioral tendencies more strongly than stereotypes do and usually mediate stereotype-to-behavioral-tendency links.

Dai T., Zuo B., & Wen F. F . ( 2014).

The compensation effect between warmth and competence in social cognition

Advance in Psychological Science,22( 3), 502-511.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

The two fundamental dimensions of social cognition are warmth and competence of Stereotype Content Model (SCM). Compesation effect is a tendency to differentiate two social targets in a comparative context on the two fundamental dimensions by contrasting them in a compensatory direction. There are two means of measuring the compensation effect, that is, direct measurement and indirect measurement. In addition, there are two basic categories in the compensation effect, one is the mutual compensation between competence and warmth, the other contain compensation of competence for warmth and compensation of warmth for competence. The psychological mechanisms of the compensation effect could probably be contrast effect, system justification theory and mixed stereotypes. Admittedly, the compensation effect, which was widely applied in interpersonal and intergroup social cognition, needs further deepening and expansion in respect of theoretical research and practical applications.

[ 代涛涛, 佐斌, 温芳芳 . ( 2014).

社会认知中热情与能力的补偿效应

心理科学进展,22( 3), 502-511.]

URL     [本文引用: 1]

The two fundamental dimensions of social cognition are warmth and competence of Stereotype Content Model (SCM). Compesation effect is a tendency to differentiate two social targets in a comparative context on the two fundamental dimensions by contrasting them in a compensatory direction. There are two means of measuring the compensation effect, that is, direct measurement and indirect measurement. In addition, there are two basic categories in the compensation effect, one is the mutual compensation between competence and warmth, the other contain compensation of competence for warmth and compensation of warmth for competence. The psychological mechanisms of the compensation effect could probably be contrast effect, system justification theory and mixed stereotypes. Admittedly, the compensation effect, which was widely applied in interpersonal and intergroup social cognition, needs further deepening and expansion in respect of theoretical research and practical applications.

Dorrough A. R., Glöckner A., Hellmann D. M., & Ebert I . ( 2015).

The development of ingroup favoritism in repeated social dilemmas

Frontiers in Psychology , 6: 476.

URL     PMID:4411968      [本文引用: 1]

In two comprehensive and fully incentivized studies, we investigate the development of ingroup favoritism as one of two aspects of parochial altruism in repeated social dilemmas. Specifically, we test whether ingroup favoritism is a fixed phenomenon that can be observed from the very beginning and remains stable over time, or whether it develops (increases vs. decreases) during repeated contact. Ingroup favoritism is assessed through cooperation behavior in a repeated continuous prisoner's dilemma where participants sequentially interact with 10 members of the ingroup (own city and university) and subsequently with 10 members of the outgroup (other city and university), or vice versa. In none of the experiments do we observe initial differences in cooperation behavior for interaction partners from the ingroup, as compared to outgroup, and we only observe small differences in expectations regarding the interaction partners' cooperation behavior. After repeated interaction, however, including a change of groups, clear ingroup favoritism can be observed. Instead of being due to gradual and potentially biased updating of expectations, we found that these emerging differences were mainly driven by the change of interaction partners' group membership that occurred after round 10. This indicates that in social dilemma settings ingroup favoritism is to some degree dynamic in that it is enhanced and sometimes only observable if group membership is activated by thinking about both the interaction with the ingroup and the outgroup.

Dovidio J. F., Love A., Schellhaas F. M. H., & Hewstone M . ( 2017).

Reducing intergroup bias through intergroup contact: twenty years of progress and future directions

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20( 5), 136843021771205.

[本文引用: 1]

Durrheim K., Quayle M., Tredoux C. G., Titlestad K., & Tooke L . ( 2016).

Investigating the evolution of ingroup favoritism using a minimal group interaction paradigm: The effects of inter-and intragroup interdependence

Plos One,11( 11), e0165974.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Fiske S.T . ( 1993).

Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping

American Psychologist, 48( 6), 621-628

URL     PMID:8328729      [本文引用: 1]

Abstract This article presents a theory of the mutually reinforcing interaction between power and stereotyping, mediated by attention. The powerless attend to the powerful who control their outcomes, in an effort to enhance prediction and control, so forming complex, potentially nonstereotypic impressions. The powerful pay less attention, so are more vulnerable to stereotyping. The powerful (a) need not attend to the other to control their own outcomes, (b) cannot attend because they tend to be attentionally overloaded, and (c) if they have high need for dominance, may not want to attend. Stereotyping and power are mutually reinforcing because stereotyping itself exerts control, maintaining and justifying the status quo. Two legal cases and a body of research illustrate the theory and suggest organizational change strategies.

Fiske S. T., Cuddy A. J. C., & Glick P . ( 2007).

Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence

Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11( 2), 77-83.

URL     PMID:17188552      [本文引用: 2]

Abstract Like all perception, social perception reflects evolutionary pressures. In encounters with conspecifics, social animals must determine, immediately, whether the "other" is friend or foe (i.e. intends good or ill) and, then, whether the "other" has the ability to enact those intentions. New data confirm these two universal dimensions of social cognition: warmth and competence. Promoting survival, these dimensions provide fundamental social structural answers about competition and status. People perceived as warm and competent elicit uniformly positive emotions and behavior, whereas those perceived as lacking warmth and competence elicit uniform negativity. People classified as high on one dimension and low on the other elicit predictable, ambivalent affective and behavioral reactions. These universal dimensions explain both interpersonal and intergroup social cognition.

Fiske S. T., Cuddy A. J. C., Glick P., & Xu J . ( 2002).

A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82( 6), 878-902.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Fiske S.T . ( 2018).

Stereotype content: Warmth and competence endure

Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27( 2), 67-73.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Social psychologists have studied stereotypes since the start of the twentieth century. Investigation proceeded at first descriptively, then in a process-oriented manner that evolved with the broader field into increasingly cognitive explanations, and now marrying those approaches to social neuroscience. The illustrative case is stereotype content, first studied in the 1930s, then dormant as... [Show full abstract]

Hayward L. E., Tropp L. R., Hornsey M. J., & Barlow F. K . ( 2017).

Toward a comprehensive understanding of intergroup contact descriptions and mediators of positive and negative contact among majority and minority groups

Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 43( 3), 347-364.

[本文引用: 1]

Hoffman C., & Hurst N .( 1990).

Gender stereotypes: perception or rationalization?

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58( 2), 197-208.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Abstract It is proposed that gender stereotypes arise to rationalize the distribution of the sexes into social roles. Ss read descriptions of members of two fictional categories, one having 80% "city workers" and 20% "child raisers," the other with the percentages reversed. They later made personality ratings of each category and of the category subgroups occupying each role. Ss formed role-based category stereotypes that affected their ratings even when targets' roles were specified. Stronger stereotypes arose when the categories were biologically defined or when Ss attempted to explain the category ole correlation. The basic effect was replicated using roles that are not differentially linked to familiar human groups. The findings are interpreted as showing that stereotypes can arise solely in response to a sexual division of labor and serve to rationalize this division by attributing to the sexes intrinsic personality differences. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

Holoien D.S., & Fiske S.T . ( 2013).

Downplaying positive impressions: Compensation between warmth and competence in impression management

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49( 1), 33-41.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Johnson D.W .( 2003).

Social interdependence: interrelationships among theory, research, and practice

American Psychologist, 58( 11), 934-945.

URL     PMID:14609388      [本文引用: 1]

Social interdependence theory is a classic example of the interaction among theory, research, and practice. The premise of the theory is that the way in which goals are structured determines how individuals interact, which in turn creates outcomes. Over 750 research studies have been conducted in the past 11 decades on the relative merits of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic efforts and the conditions under which each is appropriate. These studies have validated, modified, refined, and extended the theory. Social interdependence theory has been widely applied, especially in education. The applications have resulted in revisions of the theory and the generation of considerable new research.

Judd C. M., James-Hawkins L., Yzerbyt V., & Kashima Y . ( 2005).

Fundamental dimensions of social judgment: Understanding the relations between judgments of competence and warmth

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89( 6), 899-913.

URL     [本文引用: 2]

Kanas A., Scheepers P., & Sterkens C . ( 2017).

Positive and negative contact and attitudes towards the religious out-group: testing the contact hypothesis in conflict and non-conflict regions of Indonesia and the Philippines

Social Science Research, 63, 95-110.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Kervyn N., Bergsieker H. B., & Fiske S. T . ( 2012).

The innuendo effect: hearing the positive but inferring the negative

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48( 1), 77-85.

URL     PMID:26023243      [本文引用: 2]

78 We show the innuendo effect: Negative inferences from positive target descriptions. 78 Listeners infer that targets described only as very competent are also cold. 78 Listeners infer that targets described only as very warm are also incompetent. 78 Innuendo leads listeners to exclude targets in work and social contexts. 78 Innuendo propagates, especially for stereotyped targets (e.g., women at work).

Kervyn N., Yzerbyt V. Y., & Judd C. M . ( 2011).

When compensation guides inferences: indirect and implicit measures of the compensation effect

European Journal of Social Psychology, 41( 2), 144-150.

URL     [本文引用: 3]

Research has found the dimensions of warmth and competence to be subject to a negative relation when two targets are compared, a phenomenon which has been called the compensation effect. However, all the available empirical evidence rests on direct traits ratings. The aim of the present work is to test whether compensation is merely a response strategy or whether it has larger implications. In two experiments, we show that the compensation effect is also obtained on indirect measures that rely on attribution theory (Experiment 1) and on implicit measures derived from the Linguistic Category Model (Experiment 2). Results are discussed in terms of the importance of the compensation effect and its consequences on the interpretation of newly acquired information about social targets. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Kervyn N., Yzerbyt V. Y., Judd C. M., & Nunes A . ( 2009).

A question of compensation: The social life of the fundamental dimensions of social perception

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96( 4), 828-842.

URL     PMID:19309205      [本文引用: 2]

This research examines the impact of the compensation effect between the fundamental dimensions of warmth and competence on behavioral confirmation. In Experiment 1, participants were presented with 2 groups that varied on 1 of the 2 dimensions and asked to select the questions that they wanted to pose to learn more about the groups. Participants preferred to ask negative (positive) questions about the unmanipulated dimension to the high (low) group. In Experiment 2, participants rated the 2 groups on the basis of na ve people answers to those questions. As predicted, compensation emerged. Experiment 3 involved interactions among 3 participants, 1 interviewing the other 2 using the questions selected in Experiment 1. Ratings of targets' reactions again showed compensation.

Meeusen C., Barlow F. K., & Sibley C. G . ( 2017).

Generalized and specific components of prejudice: The decomposition of intergroup context effects

European Journal of Social Psychology, 47( 4), 443-456.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Rast III D. E., Gaffney A. M., & Yang F. G . ( 2017).

The effect of stereotype content on intergroup uncertainty and interactions. The

Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 1-10.

URL     PMID:29166218      [本文引用: 1]

Abstract Drawing on intergroup threat theory and the stereotype content model, we examine intergroup relations in an organizational context. We surveyed 108 Asian immigrants working at a large international organization located in the UK. We found that perceptions of warmth and competence interact to predict minority group members' willingness to interact with an outgroup majority. Extending previous research, we demonstrate that warmth and competence differentially affect intergroup uncertainty, which mediates the relationship between stereotype content and willingness to interact with the outgroup. Three novel aspects of this research contribute to the existing literature: (1) the focus on stereotype content eliciting intergroup emotions; (2) examining the thoughts and feelings of a minority group (Asian immigrants) toward the majority group (British citizens); (3) the organizational context of the sample presents a real-world situation.

Schaller M., Park J. H., & Faulkner J . ( 2003).

Prehistoric dangers and contemporary prejudices

European Review of Social Psychology, 14( 1), 105-137.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

We review the logical principles that guide the application of evolutionary ideas to psychological problems, and show how these principles can be used to derive novel, testable hypotheses about contemporary prejudice processes. We summarise two recent lines of research employing this approach. One line of research examines prejudices resulting from perceived vulnerability to physical injury. The other examines prejudices resulting from perceived vulnerability to disease. Results from both lines of research support novel psychological hypotheses identifying variables--pertaining to both personality and to local context--that trigger specific prejudices against specific categories of people. We conclude by discussing more broadly some of the useful conceptual and practical implications of this evolutionary approach to prejudice.

Sherif M., Harvey O. J., White B. J., Hood W. R., & Sherif C. W . ( 1961).

Intergroup cooperation and conflict: The robbers cave experiment.

Norman, OK: University ofOklahoma Book Exchange.

[本文引用: 1]

Ufkes E. G., Otten S., van der Zee K. I., Giebels E., & Dovidio J. F . ( 2011).

The effect of stereotype content on anger versus contempt in “day-to-day” conflicts

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 15( 1), 57-74.

URL     [本文引用: 4]

Depending on how involved parties appraise day-to-day conflicts, they either may feel angry or contemptuous toward the other party, which, in turn, may result in stronger confronting or avoiding intentions. In this paper we investigated how the content of stereotypes associated with the group to which an outgroup perpetrator belongs affects appraisals, emotions, and behavior. In two experiments, we demonstrated that stereotyping an outgroup as less warm resulted in increased feelings of anger, and tendencies to react forcefully toward an outgroup party in a conflict. Specifically, this effect of low stereotype warmth was explained by increased appraisals of negative intentions. Stereotyping an outgroup as less competent in the same situation elicited increased feelings of contempt, and tendencies to avoid an outgroup party in a conflict. This effect of stereotype incompetence was due to decreased appraisals of control over the other party

Uskul A., & Over H . ( 2017).

Culture, social interdependence, and ostracism

Current Directions in Psychological Science,26( 4), 371-376.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Recent research has demonstrated that cultural groups differ in how they experience ostracism and in how they behave in the wake of being ostracized. We review this literature paying particular attention to the role that one key cultural variable, social interdependence, plays in moderating responses to ostracism. Although the data present a complex picture, a growing number of studies have suggested that collectivistic cultures and high levels of social interdependence are associated with less negative responses to ostracism. We review explanations for observed cultural and individual-level differences in responses to ostracism and make a series of suggestions for future research that, we hope, will disambiguate current findings and offer a more nuanced picture of ostracism and the significance of cultural variation inherent within it.

Vezzali L., Turner R., Capozza D., & Trifiletti E . ( 2018).

Does intergroup contact affect personality? a longitudinal study on the bidirectional relationship between intergroup contact and personality traits

European Journal of Social Psychology, 48( 2), 159-173.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Wen F., Zuo B., Wu Y., Dong X., & Wang W . ( 2016).

Reducing the effect of stereotype threat: The role of coaction contexts and regulatory fit

Social Psychology of Education, 19( 3), 607-626.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Two experiments examined the effects of competition and cooperation contexts, as well as regulatory fit, on reducing the negative influence of stereotype threat. Experiment 1 demonstrated that in high stereotype threat conditions, participants in the cooperation context scored significantly higher on a math test than those in the competition context, while participants in low stereotype threat conditions did not differ in both contexts. Experiment 2 found that under stereotype threat, participants with induced prevention focus scored significantly higher on a math test in the cooperation context than those in the competition context or control group. At the same time, participants with induced promotion foci did not differ between the contexts. Thus, while the cooperation context may counteract the effect of stereotype threat, inducing a promotion focus may create a regulatory fit in the competition context that could also remove the effect of stereotype threat.

Wolgast A., & Fischer N .( 2017).

You are not alone: Colleague support and goal-oriented cooperation as resources to reduce teachers’ stress

Social Psychology of Education, 20( 1), 97-114.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Yzerbyt V. Y., Kervyn N., & Judd C. M . ( 2008).

Compensation versus halo: The unique relations between the fundamental dimensions of social judgment

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34( 8), 1110-1123.

URL     [本文引用: 1]

Zuo B., Dai T. T., Wen F. F., & Suo Y.X . ( 2015).

The big two model in social cognition

Journal of Psychological Science, 38( 4), 1019-1023.

[本文引用: 3]

[ 佐斌, 代涛涛, 温芳芳, 索玉贤 . ( 2015).

社会认知内容的“大二”模型

心理科学, 38( 4), 1019-1023.]

[本文引用: 3]

Zuo B., Dai T. T., Wen F. F., & Teng T. T . ( 2014).

The relationship between warmth and competence in social cognition

Advances in Psychological Science, 22( 9), 1467-1474.

URL     [本文引用: 3]

The two fundamental dimensions of social cognition are warmth and competence. The special relationship between warmth and competence may be a positive relationship suggested by halo effect, or a negative relationship suggested by compensation effect and innuendo effect, or an orthogonal relationship affected by many factors. The perceiver factors, the characteristics of target, the relationship between perceiver and target as well as the external environment could influence the relationship between warmth and competence. The internal mechanism of different type of relationships is unclear in current study, which is the root cause of the dispute. In order to slove this dispute, we should further discussed the internal mechanism of warmth and competence in the future, take more cross-cultural comparison study, and further explore the influence factors of the relationship to build a relationship model of warmth and competence.

[ 佐斌, 代涛涛, 温芳芳, 滕婷婷 . ( 2014).

热情与能力的关系及影响因素

心理科学进展, 22( 9), 1467-1474.]

URL     [本文引用: 3]

The two fundamental dimensions of social cognition are warmth and competence. The special relationship between warmth and competence may be a positive relationship suggested by halo effect, or a negative relationship suggested by compensation effect and innuendo effect, or an orthogonal relationship affected by many factors. The perceiver factors, the characteristics of target, the relationship between perceiver and target as well as the external environment could influence the relationship between warmth and competence. The internal mechanism of different type of relationships is unclear in current study, which is the root cause of the dispute. In order to slove this dispute, we should further discussed the internal mechanism of warmth and competence in the future, take more cross-cultural comparison study, and further explore the influence factors of the relationship to build a relationship model of warmth and competence.

Zuo B., Zhang Y. Y., Zhao J., & Wang J . ( 2006).

The stereotype content model and its researches

Advances in Psychological Science, 14( 1), 138-145.

[本文引用: 1]

[ 佐斌, 张阳阳, 赵菊, 王娟 . ( 2006).

刻板印象内容模型:理论假设及研究

心理科学进展, 14( 1), 138-145.]

[本文引用: 1]

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

/