ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B

心理学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (6): 786-800.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00786

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    下一篇


李琎1,2, 孙宇1,2, 杨子鹿3, 钟毅平1,2()   

  1. 1 湖南师范大学教育科学学院心理系
    2 认知与人类行为湖南省重点实验室, 长沙 410081
    3 湖南农业大学教育学院应用心理系, 长沙 410081
  • 收稿日期:2019-08-30 出版日期:2020-06-25 发布日期:2020-04-22
  • 通讯作者: 钟毅平
  • 基金资助:
    * 中国自然科学基金面上项目(31671134);国家社会科学基金重大项目(17ZDA326);湖南省社科青年项目(19YBQ080);湖南省社科青年项目(18YBQ069);湖南省研究生科研创新项目(CX2018B236)

Social value orientation modulates the processing of social rewards for self: Evidence from ERPs study

LI Jin1,2, SUN Yu1,2, YANG Zilu3, ZHONG Yiping1,2()   

  1. 1 Department of Psychology, Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410081, China
    2 Cognition and Human Behavior Key Laboratory of Hunan Province, Changsha 410081, China
    3 Department of Applied Psychology, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha 410081, China
  • Received:2019-08-30 Online:2020-06-25 Published:2020-04-22
  • Contact: ZHONG Yiping


社会价值取向(Social Value Orientation, SVO)是相互依存情境下人们对自己和他人分配结果的一种稳定的社会偏好, 按SVO不同可以将个体分为“亲社会取向”和“亲自我取向”个体。已有研究表明SVO影响个体对涉及自我金钱奖赏的结果评价加工, 而它如何影响自我社会奖赏加工过程尚不明确。本研究让亲社会取向和亲自我取向被试完成涉及自我社会奖赏(包含社会接纳和自我成就感)的猜牌建议给予任务, 同时记录其加工他人对建议的反馈(接受vs.拒绝)和他人最终结果(收益vs.损失)时诱发的脑电成分。结果发现, 在建议反馈加工阶段, 相比亲自我取向个体, 亲社会取向个体在反馈相关负波(FRN)波幅(峰-峰值)和P3平均波幅上, 建议被对方接受和被对方拒绝所诱发的波幅差异均显著; 在他人最终结果加工阶段, 建议被对方拒绝后, 对于亲社会取向个体, 对方损失诱发的反馈相关负FRN波幅比对方收益诱发的波幅更负, 而对方损失诱发的P3波幅小于对方收益诱发的波幅; 对于亲自我取向个体, 对方损失与收益诱发的FRN波幅无差异, 对方损失诱发的P3波幅显著大于对方收益诱发的波幅。这些结果表明社会价值取向调节个体对自我社会奖赏的加工。

关键词: 社会价值取向, 结果评价, 建议给予, 自我社会奖赏, 事件相关电位(ERPs)


Social value orientation (SVO) is a relatively stable personality trait that reflects how the individual evaluate interdependent outcomes for oneself and the other in human social environments. Previous studies showed that people could be classified into proselfs and prosocials by assessing the Triple-Dominance Measure. Emerging studies have demonstrated that SVO is a personality trait that is closely associated with the processing of rewards allocation. Outcome evaluation is closely associated with the reward processing. Past research always focused on the modulation of SVO on the outcomes evaluation involving the monetary rewards. However, relatively little is known about how the SVO modulates the processing of outcome evaluation involving the social rewards for self.

In the present study, we adopted the Event-related potentials (ERPs) technology to examine the temporal processing of the influence of SVO on the processing of the social reward for self. In particular, we focused on two types of social reward in this study, i.e., the “social acceptance” and “reflected glory”. Advice-giving is a typical or common way for individuals to gain the social acceptance and reflected glory. Evaluating outcomes of advice involves with these two kinds of social rewards. Specifically, if individuals' advice is accepted, they may feel that they have garnered the "social acceptance". Further, if the advice provided leads to another's personal success, individuals may further feel a sense of reward through “reflected glory”. The proselfs (n = 26) and prosocials (n = 25) were asked to complete the advice-giving guessing card task, in which task participants acted as an advisor who selected one of two advice options to give another person. Subsequently, all participants were informed that the other accepted (vs. rejected) their advice and the other's final outcome (gain vs. loss), while recording their electroencephalogram (EEG) at the feedback from the other processing stage (advice was accepted or rejected by the other) and outcomes for the other (gain or loss) processing stage.

We focused on the feedback-related negativity (FRN) and P3 in outcome evaluation. The results of ERPs showed that at the feedback from the other processing stage, compared with the proselfs, the prosocials are more sensitive to the feedback from the other. In particular, at the early stage (FRN), there was no difference between having the advice accepting and rejecting for proselfs, however, this FRN effect was observed in the prosocials participants. At the later stage (P3), we also found there was a difference between having the advice accepting and rejecting for prosocials but not for the proselfs. On the other hand, at the final outcome for the other processing stage, at the early stage, there was a main effect of SVO, indicating that for prosocials, the FRN peak-to-peak value is more negative than the proselfs. There was a significant interaction among the SVO, Feedback from the other and Outcome for the other in the FRN. For the prosocials, there was a difference between the other's gain and loss in FRN following their own selections (i.e., advice) were rejected, whereas this difference did not emerge for the proselfs. In addition, we also observed that there was a significant interaction among the SVO, Feedback from the other and Outcome for the other in the P3. In particular, following the participant's advice was rejected, for the prosocials, compared with the other's loss outcome, the other's gain outcome elicited a larger P3. However, for the proselfs, the P3 showed a different pattern, showing that following the participant's advice was rejected, compared with the other's gain outcome, the other's loss outcome elicited a larger P3.

Our findings indicates that the influences of SVO on the processing of self-rewards occurs at the early stage (mirrored in FRN) and the late stage (mirrored in P3). At the feedback from the other processing stage, at the early and the later stages, compared with prosoicals, the proselfs are relatively insensitive to the other's feedback about the advice (rejecting or accepting). At the final outcome for the other processing stage, at the earlier stage, prosocials are sensitive to the others' wins or losses in both the “accepted” and “rejected” conditions, whereas proselfs are not interested in the others' outcomes in the “self are rejected” context. Furthermore, at the late stage of outcome evaluation, prosocials attaches the significance on the other's interest and proselfs attached the importance on the self-interest. Taken together, SVO has a modulation effect on the processing of social rewards.

Key words: social value orientation (SVO), outcome evaluation, advice-giving, social rewards for self, event-related potential (ERP)