心理学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 56 ›› Issue (9): 1210-1224.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.01210
收稿日期:
2023-09-27
发布日期:
2024-06-25
出版日期:
2024-09-25
通讯作者:
谢晓非
E-mail:xiaofei@pku.edu.cn
基金资助:
WANG Tianhong1, JIN Shan1, CHENG Zipeng2, LOU Yu1, XIE Xiaofei1()
Received:
2023-09-27
Online:
2024-06-25
Published:
2024-09-25
Contact:
XIE Xiaofei
E-mail:xiaofei@pku.edu.cn
摘要:
助人者在决定是否主动展示自己的利他行为时常常面临困境, 既希望获得他人赞赏, 又害怕招致负面评价。对利他行为的炫耀是否真的会遭到负面评价?助人者对社会评价的预测准确吗?本研究通过7个实验(N = 1362), 揭示了利他炫耀中的预测偏差及其潜在机制: 对于利他炫耀行为, 助人者会低估来自旁观者的社会评价; 感知到的利他动机在这一过程中起中介作用。这一发现有助于深化对利他炫耀行为及其社会评价的理解, 为鼓励助人者主动传播利他行为并进而在社会层面增强利他氛围提供依据。
中图分类号:
王天鸿, 金珊, 程子鹏, 娄宇, 谢晓非. (2024). 利他炫耀中的预测偏差:助人者低估来自旁观者的社会评价. 心理学报, 56(9), 1210-1224.
WANG Tianhong, JIN Shan, CHENG Zipeng, LOU Yu, XIE Xiaofei. (2024). The prediction bias of conspicuous altruism: Helpers underestimate social evaluations from bystanders. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 56(9), 1210-1224.
组别 | 变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
助人者 | 1. 利他动机 | 5.41 | 1.28 | 1 | ||
2. 炫耀动机 | 4.35 | 1.32 | −0.36** | 1 | ||
3. 道德评价 | 5.14 | 1.37 | 0.67*** | −0.38** | 1 | |
旁观者 | 1. 利他动机 | 5.87 | 1.10 | 1 | ||
2. 炫耀动机 | 4.07 | 1.58 | −0.44*** | 1 | ||
3. 道德评价 | 5.82 | 1.20 | 0.81*** | −0.47*** | 1 |
表1 研究4a利他动机、炫耀动机和道德评价的相关分析
组别 | 变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
助人者 | 1. 利他动机 | 5.41 | 1.28 | 1 | ||
2. 炫耀动机 | 4.35 | 1.32 | −0.36** | 1 | ||
3. 道德评价 | 5.14 | 1.37 | 0.67*** | −0.38** | 1 | |
旁观者 | 1. 利他动机 | 5.87 | 1.10 | 1 | ||
2. 炫耀动机 | 4.07 | 1.58 | −0.44*** | 1 | ||
3. 道德评价 | 5.82 | 1.20 | 0.81*** | −0.47*** | 1 |
组别 | 变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
助人者 | 1. 利他动机 | 5.79 | 0.88 | 1 | ||||
2. 炫耀动机 | 4.14 | 1.62 | −0.19 | 1 | ||||
3. 道德评价 | 5.75 | 0.95 | 0.60*** | −0.01 | 1 | |||
4. 人际评价 | 5.83 | 1.10 | 0.56*** | −0.02 | 0.83*** | 1 | ||
5. 未来利他行为预测 | 5.74 | 0.90 | 0.72*** | −0.18 | 0.70*** | 0.65*** | 1 | |
旁观者 | 1. 利他动机 | 6.03 | 0.70 | 1 | ||||
2. 炫耀动机 | 3.62 | 1.54 | −0.26* | 1 | ||||
3. 道德评价 | 6.14 | 0.56 | 0.60*** | −0.22* | 1 | |||
4. 人际评价 | 6.11 | 0.61 | 0.60*** | −0.28** | 0.53*** | 1 | ||
5. 未来利他行为预测 | 6.04 | 0.62 | 0.69*** | −0.29** | 0.57*** | 0.58*** | 1 |
表2 研究4b利他动机、炫耀动机和各种社会评价的相关分析
组别 | 变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
助人者 | 1. 利他动机 | 5.79 | 0.88 | 1 | ||||
2. 炫耀动机 | 4.14 | 1.62 | −0.19 | 1 | ||||
3. 道德评价 | 5.75 | 0.95 | 0.60*** | −0.01 | 1 | |||
4. 人际评价 | 5.83 | 1.10 | 0.56*** | −0.02 | 0.83*** | 1 | ||
5. 未来利他行为预测 | 5.74 | 0.90 | 0.72*** | −0.18 | 0.70*** | 0.65*** | 1 | |
旁观者 | 1. 利他动机 | 6.03 | 0.70 | 1 | ||||
2. 炫耀动机 | 3.62 | 1.54 | −0.26* | 1 | ||||
3. 道德评价 | 6.14 | 0.56 | 0.60*** | −0.22* | 1 | |||
4. 人际评价 | 6.11 | 0.61 | 0.60*** | −0.28** | 0.53*** | 1 | ||
5. 未来利他行为预测 | 6.04 | 0.62 | 0.69*** | −0.29** | 0.57*** | 0.58*** | 1 |
实验 | 实验材料 | 实验组 | 均值 | 标准差 | 样本量 | 效应量Cohen’s d及其95% CI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1a | 朋友圈 | 助人者 | 5.55 | 0.82 | 99 | −0.41, [−0.70, −0.13] |
旁观者 | 5.88 | 0.80 | 100 | |||
1b | 朋友圈 | 助人者 | 4.94 | 1.04 | 69 | −0.48, [−0.82, −0.14] |
旁观者 | 5.43 | 0.97 | 75 | |||
1c | 朋友圈 | 助人者−炫耀 | 5.28 | 1.17 | 100 | −0.76, [−1.08, −0.51] |
旁观者−炫耀 | 6.12 | 0.64 | 100 | |||
2 | 微博、实物 | 助人者 | 5.41 | 0.95 | 70 | −0.46, [−0.80, −0.12] |
旁观者 | 5.80 | 0.73 | 70 | |||
3 | 志愿活动官网 | 助人者 | 4.74 | 0.86 | 70 | −0.53, [−0.82, −0.19] |
旁观者 | 5.24 | 1.01 | 70 | |||
4a | 口头提及 | 助人者 | 5.14 | 1.37 | 70 | −0.53, [−0.87, −0.19] |
旁观者 | 5.82 | 1.20 | 70 | |||
4b | 朋友圈 | 助人者 | 5.75 | 0.95 | 100 | −0.50, [−0.78, −0.21] |
旁观者 | 6.14 | 0.56 | 99 |
表3 各项子研究助人组与旁观组差异检验统计结果总结
实验 | 实验材料 | 实验组 | 均值 | 标准差 | 样本量 | 效应量Cohen’s d及其95% CI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1a | 朋友圈 | 助人者 | 5.55 | 0.82 | 99 | −0.41, [−0.70, −0.13] |
旁观者 | 5.88 | 0.80 | 100 | |||
1b | 朋友圈 | 助人者 | 4.94 | 1.04 | 69 | −0.48, [−0.82, −0.14] |
旁观者 | 5.43 | 0.97 | 75 | |||
1c | 朋友圈 | 助人者−炫耀 | 5.28 | 1.17 | 100 | −0.76, [−1.08, −0.51] |
旁观者−炫耀 | 6.12 | 0.64 | 100 | |||
2 | 微博、实物 | 助人者 | 5.41 | 0.95 | 70 | −0.46, [−0.80, −0.12] |
旁观者 | 5.80 | 0.73 | 70 | |||
3 | 志愿活动官网 | 助人者 | 4.74 | 0.86 | 70 | −0.53, [−0.82, −0.19] |
旁观者 | 5.24 | 1.01 | 70 | |||
4a | 口头提及 | 助人者 | 5.14 | 1.37 | 70 | −0.53, [−0.87, −0.19] |
旁观者 | 5.82 | 1.20 | 70 | |||
4b | 朋友圈 | 助人者 | 5.75 | 0.95 | 100 | −0.50, [−0.78, −0.21] |
旁观者 | 6.14 | 0.56 | 99 |
[1] |
Anderson, C., Hildreth, J. A. D., & Howland, L. (2015). Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature. Psychological Bulletin, 141(3), 574-601. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038781
doi: 10.1037/a0038781 URL pmid: 25774679 |
[2] | Andreoni, J., & Petrie, R. (2004). Public goods experiments without confidentiality: A glimpse into fund-raising. Journal of Public Economics, 88(7-8), 1605-1623. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2727(03)00040-9 |
[3] | Ariely, D., Bracha, A., & Meier, S. (2009). Doing good or doing well? Image motivation and monetary incentives in behaving prosocially. American Economic Review, 99(1), 544-555. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.99.1.544 |
[4] |
Arnocky, S., Piché, T., Albert, G., Ouellette, D., & Barclay, P. (2017). Altruism predicts mating success in humans. British Journal of Psychology, 108(2), 416-435. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12208
doi: 10.1111/bjop.12208 URL pmid: 27426072 |
[5] | Ash, E. (2017). Emotional responses to savior films: Concealing privilege or appealing to our better selves? Projections, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.3167/proj.2017.110203 |
[6] | Ashraf, M. H., Zhang, J., & Özpolat, K. (2023). Antecedents of blatant benevolence on social media. Behaviour & Information Technology, 42(8), 1230-1252. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2069595 |
[7] | Ball, S. B., & Eckel, C. C. (1996). Buying status: Experimental evidence on status in negotiation. Psychology and Marketing, 13(4), 379-403. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199607)13:4<379::AID-MAR4>3.3.CO;2-8 |
[8] | Barclay, P. (2004). Trustworthiness and competitive altruism can also solve the “tragedy of the commons”. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25(4), 209-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.04.002 |
[9] | Barclay, P. (2012). Harnessing the power of reputation: Strengths and limits for promoting cooperative behaviors. Evolutionary Psychology, 10(5), 147470491201000. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470491201000509 |
[10] |
Barclay, P., & Willer, R. (2007). Partner choice creates competitive altruism in humans. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 274(1610), 749-753. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2006.0209
URL pmid: 17255001 |
[11] | Basu, S. (2021). Framing an altruistic action in periodic (versus aggregate) terms reduces people’s moral evaluation of the act and the actor. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 97(3), 104205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104205 |
[12] | Batson, C. D. (2010). Empathy-induced altruistic motivation. In M.Mikulincer & P. R.Shaver (Eds.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior: The better angels of our nature (pp. 15-34). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12061-001 |
[13] | Baumeister, R. F. (1982). A Self-Presentational View of Social Phenomena. 91(1), 3-26. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.91.1.3 |
[14] | Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2006). Incentives and prosocial behavior. American Economic Review, 96(5), 1652-1678. |
[15] | Berman, J. Z., Levine, E. E., Barasch, A., & Small, D. A. (2015). The braggart’s dilemma: On the social rewards and penalties of advertising prosocial behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 52(1), 90-104. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.14.0002 |
[16] | Bhogal, M. S., Farrelly, D., Galbraith, N., Manktelow, K., & Bradley, H. (2020). The role of altruistic costs in human mate choice. Personality and Individual Differences, 160, 109939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.109939 |
[17] | Black, J. F., & Davidai, S. (2020). Do rich people “deserve” to be rich? Charitable giving, internal attributions of wealth, and judgments of economic deservingness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 90, 104011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104011 |
[18] | Blakely, G. L., Andrews, M. C., & Fuller, J. (2003). Are chameleons good citizens? A longitudinal study of the relationship between self-monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18(2), 131-143. |
[19] | Bohns, V. K., & Flynn, F. J. (2010). “Why didn’t you just ask?” Underestimating the discomfort of help-seeking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2), 402-409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.12.015 |
[20] | Bourdage, J. S., Roulin, N., & Tarraf, R. (2018). “I (might be) just that good”: Honest and deceptive impression management in employment interviews. Personnel Psychology, 71(4), 597-632. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12285 |
[21] | Bracha, A., & Vesterlund, L. (2017). Mixed signals: Charity reporting when donations signal generosity and income. Games and Economic Behavior, 104, 24-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2017.03.001 |
[22] | Bradley, A., Lawrence, C., & Ferguson, E. (2018). Does observability affect prosociality? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285(1875), 20180116. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.0116 |
[23] | Braun Kohlová, M., & Urban, J. (2020). Buy green, gain prestige and social status. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 69, 101416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101416 |
[24] |
Cannon, C., & Rucker, D. D. (2019). The dark side of luxury: Social costs of luxury consumption. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(5), 767-779. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218796790
doi: 10.1177/0146167218796790 URL pmid: 30244650 |
[25] | Carlo, G., & Randall, B. A. (2002). The development of a measure of prosocial behaviors for late adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31(1), 31-44. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014033032440 |
[26] | Critcher, C. R., & Dunning, D. (2011). No good deed goes unquestioned: Cynical reconstruals maintain belief in the power of self-interest. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1207-1213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.05.001 |
[27] |
Cumming, G. (2014). The new statistics: Why and how. Psychological Science, 25(1), 7-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613504966
doi: 10.1177/0956797613504966 URL pmid: 24220629 |
[28] | Danheiser, P. R., & Graziano, W. G. (1982). Self-monitoring and cooperation as a self-presentational strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(3), 497-505. |
[29] | Demczuk, R., Mantovani, D., & Fernandes, D. (2023). Looking up or down on the social ladder: How socioeconomic comparisons shape judgments about monetary and time donations. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 36(3), e2308. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2308 |
[30] | Ellingsen, T., & Johannesson, M. (2011). Conspicuous generosity. Journal of Public Economics, 95(9-10), 1131-1143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.05.002 |
[31] | Engelmann, D., & Fischbacher, U. (2009). Indirect reciprocity and strategic reputation building in an experimental helping game. Games and Economic Behavior, 67(2), 399-407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2008.12.006 |
[32] |
Epley, N., Keysar, B., Van Boven, L., & Gilovich, T. (2004). Perspective taking as egocentric anchoring and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(3), 327-339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.327
URL pmid: 15382983 |
[33] |
Farrelly, D., & King, L. (2019). Mutual mate choice drives the desirability of altruism in relationships. Current Psychology, 38(4), 977-981. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00194-0
doi: 10.1007/s12144-019-00194-0 URL |
[34] |
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. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
doi: 10.3758/bf03193146 URL pmid: 17695343 |
[35] |
Gneezy, A., Gneezy, U., Nelson, L. D., & Brown, A. (2010). Shared social responsibility: A field experiment in pay-what-you-want pricing and charitable giving. Science, 329(5989), 325-327.
doi: 10.1126/science.1186744 pmid: 20647467 |
[36] | Goh, J. X., Hall, J. A., & Rosenthal, R. (2016). Mini meta-analysis of your own studies: Some arguments on why and a primer on how. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(10), 535-549. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12267 |
[37] | Grace, D., & Griffin, D. (2006). Exploring conspicuousness in the context of donation behaviour. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 11(2), 147-154. https://doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.24 |
[38] | Green, T., & Peloza, J. (2014). Finding the right shade of green: The effect of advertising appeal type on environmentally friendly consumption. Journal of Advertising, 43(2), 128-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2013.834805 |
[39] |
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., Sundie, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Miller, G. F., & Kenrick, D. T. (2007). Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(1), 85-102. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.1.85
URL pmid: 17605591 |
[40] |
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017346
doi: 10.1037/a0017346 URL pmid: 20175620 |
[41] | Haidt, J. (2003). The moral emotions. In R. J.Davidson, K. R.Scherer, & H. H.Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp. 852-870). Oxford University Press. |
[42] |
Hardy, C. L., & Van Vugt, M. (2006). Nice guys finish first: The competitive altruism hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(10), 1402-1413. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206291006
URL pmid: 16963610 |
[43] |
Heyman, G., Barner, D., Heumann, J., & Schenck, L. (2014). Children’s sensitivity to ulterior motives when evaluating prosocial behavior. Cognitive Science, 38(4), 683-700. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12089
doi: 10.1111/cogs.12089 URL pmid: 24069904 |
[44] | Huberman, B. A., Loch, C. H., & Önçüler, A. (2004). Status as a valued resource. Social Psychology Quarterly, 67(1), 103-114. |
[45] | Iredale, W., Van Vugt, M., & Dunbar, R. (2008). Showing off in humans: Male generosity as a mating signal. Evolutionary Psychology, 6(3), 147470490800600. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470490800600302 |
[46] | Johnson, C. M., Tariq, A., & Baker, T. L. (2018). From gucci to green bags: Conspicuous consumption as a signal for pro-social behavior. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 26(4), 339-356. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2018.1487769 |
[47] | Johnson, S. G. B., & Park, S. Y. (2021). Moral signaling through donations of money and time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 165, 183-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2021.05.004 |
[48] | Karlan, D., & McConnell, M. A. (2014). Hey look at me: The effect of giving circles on giving. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 106, 402-412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2014.06.013 |
[49] | Kraus, M. W., & Mendes, W. B. (2014). Sartorial symbols of social class elicit class-consistent behavioral and physiological responses: A dyadic approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(6), 2330-2340. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000023 |
[50] | Kraut, R. E. (1973). Effects of social labeling on giving to charity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9(6), 551-562. |
[51] | Lacetera, N., & Macis, M. (2010). Social image concerns and prosocial behavior: Field evidence from a nonlinear incentive scheme. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 76(2), 225-237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2010.08.007 |
[52] | Li, Y., Xu, F., & Kong, S. (2015). The availability heuristic in judgment and decision making. Psychological Research, 8(5), 20-26. |
[李燕, 徐富明, 孔诗晓. (2015). 判断与决策中的易得性启发式. 心理研究, 8(5), 20-26.] | |
[53] | Lin-Healy, F., & Small, D. A. (2012). Cheapened altruism: Discounting personally affected prosocial actors. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(2), 269-274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.11.006 |
[54] | Lin-Healy, F., & Small, D. A. (2013). Nice guys finish last and guys in last are nice: The clash between doing well and doing good. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(6), 692-698. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550613476308 |
[55] | McShane, B. B., & Böckenholt, U. (2017). Single-paper meta- analysis: Benefits for study summary, theory testing, and replicability. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(6), 1048-1063. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucw085 |
[56] | Miller, G. F. (2007). Sexual selection for moral virtues. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 82(2), 97-125. https://doi.org/10.1086/517857 |
[57] | Nelissen, R. M. A., & Meijers, M. H. C. (2011). Social benefits of luxury brands as costly signals of wealth and status. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32(5), 343-355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.12.002 |
[58] | Newark, D. A., Bohns, V. K., & Flynn, F. J. (2017). A helping hand is hard at work: Help-seekers’ underestimation of helpers’ effort. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 139, 18-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.01.001 |
[59] |
Newman, G. E., & Cain, D. M. (2014). Tainted altruism: When doing some good is evaluated as worse than doing no good at all. Psychological Science, 25(3), 648-655. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613504785
doi: 10.1177/0956797613504785 URL pmid: 24403396 |
[60] | Newman, G. E., & Shen, J. Y. (2012). The counterintuitive effects of thank-you gifts on charitable giving. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(5), 973-983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2012.05.002 |
[61] |
Nook, E. C., Ong, D. C., Morelli, S. A., Mitchell, J. P., & Zaki, J. (2016). Prosocial conformity: Prosocial norms generalize across behavior and empathy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(8), 1045-1062. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216649932
doi: 10.1177/0146167216649932 URL pmid: 27229679 |
[62] | Paulin, M., Ferguson, R. J., Jost, N., & Fallu, J.-M. (2014). Motivating millennials to engage in charitable causes through social media. Journal of Service Management, 25(3), 334-348. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-05-2013-0122 |
[63] |
Ran, Y., Niu, Y., & Chen, S. (2021). “More” is less: Why multiple payment mechanism impairs individual donation. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(4), 413-430. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00413
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00413 URL |
[冉雅璇, 牛熠欣, 陈斯允. (2021). “多”反而少: 元认知推断视角下支付渠道数量对个体捐赠的影响. 心理学报, 53(4), 413-430.]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00413 |
|
[64] | Rifkin, J. R., Du, K. M., & Berger, J. (2021). Penny for your preferences: Leveraging self-expression to encourage small prosocial gifts. Journal of Marketing, 85(3), 204-219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920928064 |
[65] | Romani, S., Grappi, S., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2016). Corporate socially responsible initiatives and their effects on consumption of green products. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(2), 253-264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2485-0 |
[66] | Saxton, G. D., & Wang, L. (2014). The social network effect: The determinants of giving through social media. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43(5), 850-868. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764013485159 |
[67] | Schroeder, J., Waytz, A., & Epley, N. (2017). Endorsing help for others that you oppose for yourself: Mind perception alters the perceived effectiveness of paternalism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146(8), 1106-1125. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000320 |
[68] | Sexton, S. E., & Sexton, A. L. (2014). Conspicuous conservation: The Prius halo and willingness to pay for environmental bona fides. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 67(3), 303-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2013.11.004 |
[69] |
Shang, X., Chen, Z., & Lu, J. (2021). “Will I be judged harshly after trying to help but causing more troubles?” A misprediction about help recipients. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(3), 291-305. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00291
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00291 URL |
[尚雪松, 陈卓, 陆静怡. (2021). 帮忙失败后我会被差评吗? 好心帮倒忙中的预测偏差. 心理学报, 53(3), 291-305. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00291]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00291 URL |
|
[70] | Small, D. A., & Cryder, C. (2016). Prosocial consumer behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology, 10, 107-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.01.001 |
[71] |
Srna, S., Barasch, A., & Small, D. A. (2022). On the value of modesty: How signals of status undermine cooperation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 123(4), 676-692. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000303
doi: 10.1037/pspa0000303 URL pmid: 35446079 |
[72] | Tamir, D. I., & Mitchell, J. P. (2013). Anchoring and adjustment during social inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(1), 151-162. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028232 |
[73] | Valsesia, F., Nunes, J. C., & Ordanini, A. (2021). I am not talking to you: Partitioning an audience in an attempt to solve the self-promotion dilemma. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 165, 76-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2021.04.006 |
[74] | Van Vugt, M., & Hardy, C. L. (2010). Cooperation for reputation: Wasteful contributions as costly signals in public goods. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13(1), 101-111. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430209342258 |
[75] | Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class: An economic study in the evolution of institutions. Macmillan. |
[76] | Wallace, E., Buil, I., & De Chernatony, L. (2020). ‘Consuming good’ on social media: What can conspicuous virtue signalling on facebook tell us about prosocial and unethical intentions? Journal of Business Ethics, 162(3), 577-592. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3999-7 |
[77] |
Wang, Y., & Xie, X. (2019). Prediction errors in helping and help-seeking: Causes and coping. Advances in Psychological Science, 27(1), 117-127. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.00117
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.00117 URL |
[王逸璐, 谢晓非. (2019). 帮助情境中的预测偏差: 成因与应对. 心理科学进展, 26(12), 117-127.] | |
[78] | Waters, R. D., Burnett, E., Lamm, A., & Lucas, J. (2009). Engaging stakeholders through social networking: How nonprofit organizations are using Facebook. Public Relations Review, 35(2), 102-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.01.006 |
[79] | West, P. (2004). Conspicuous compassion: Why sometimes it really is cruel to be kind. Civitas Institute for the Study of Civil Society. |
[80] | White, K., & Peloza, J. (2009). Self-benefit versus other-benefit marketing appeals: Their effectiveness in generating charitable support. Journal of Marketing, 73(4), 109-124. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.73.4.109 |
[81] | Yang, A. X., & Hsee, C. K. (2022). Obligatory publicity increases charitable acts. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(5), 839-857. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucab020 |
[82] |
Yao, Q., Wu, Z., Zhang, C., & Fu, G. (2020). Effect of power on conspicuous prosocial behavior. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 52(12), 1421-1435. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.01421
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.01421 URL |
[姚琦, 吴章建, 张常清, 符国群. (2020). 权力感对炫耀性亲社会行为的影响. 心理学报, 52(12), 1421-1435. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.01421]
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.01421 URL |
|
[83] |
Zahavi, A. (1975). Mate selection—A selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 53(1), 205-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(75)90111-3
doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(75)90111-3 URL pmid: 1195756 |
[84] | Zahavi, A., & Zahavi, A. (1997). Showing off. In The handicap principle: A missing piece of Darwin’s puzzle. (pp.96-97). Oxford University Press. |
[85] | Zane, D. M., Smith, R. W., & Reczek, R. W. (2020). The meaning of distraction: How metacognitive inferences from distraction during multitasking affect brand evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 46(5), 974-994. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucz035 |
[1] | 王婧嫣, 张洪. 直觉还是推理?亲社会行为的决策模式与人性感知[J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(9): 1225-1238. |
[2] | 石荣, 刘昌, 唐慧琳, 郝俊懿, 沈汪兵. 自发的善行:加工模式和情境紧急性影响亲社会行为[J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(9): 1239-1251. |
[3] | 林靓, 徐博雅, 杨莹, 张庆鹏, 寇彧. 青少年亲社会行为的网络分析及核心维度[J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(9): 1252-1265. |
[4] | 张玮玮, 陈逸群, 朱莉琪. “近朱者赤”:同伴捐赠决策信息对青少年亲社会行为的影响及公正世界信念的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(9): 1453-1464. |
[5] | 刘倩文, 王振宏. 亲子关系、感觉加工敏感性与COMT Val158Met多态性对学前儿童亲社会行为的交互影响[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(5): 711-725. |
[6] | 邱天, 江南, 陆静怡. 切忌班门弄斧?低估在评价者擅长领域展现能力的好处[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(5): 766-780. |
[7] | 段文婷, 孙启武, 王铭, 吴才智, 陈真珍. 青少年早期亲社会行为倾向、内化问题和外化问题发展级联的个体内分析[J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(7): 813-827. |
[8] | 刘文兴, 祝养浩, 柏阳, 王海江, 韩翼. 孤芳自赏还是乐于助人?员工自恋对亲社会行为的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(3): 300-312. |
[9] | 张文新, 李曦, 陈光辉, 曹衍淼. 母亲积极教养与青少年亲社会行为:共情的中介作用与OXTR基因的调节作用[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(9): 976-991. |
[10] | 陈思静, 濮雪丽, 朱玥, 汪昊, 刘建伟. 规范错觉对外出就餐中食物浪费的影响:心理机制与应对策略[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(8): 904-918. |
[11] | 尚雪松, 陈卓, 陆静怡. 帮忙失败后我会被差评吗?好心帮倒忙中的预测偏差[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(3): 291-305. |
[12] | 孙琳, 段涛, 刘伟, 陈宁. 特质正念对初中生学业情绪预测偏差的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(11): 1203-1214. |
[13] | 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. |
[14] | 姚琦, 吴章建, 张常清, 符国群. 权力感对炫耀性亲社会行为的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(12): 1421-1435. |
[15] | 王建峰, 戴冰. “追名弃利”:权力动机与社会存在对亲社会行为的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(1): 55-65. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||