心理学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (5): 584-596.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00584 cstr: 32110.14.2020.00584
收稿日期:
2019-06-18
发布日期:
2020-03-26
出版日期:
2020-05-25
基金资助:
ZHENG Xutao1,2, GUO Wenjiao1, CHEN Man1, JIN Jia3, YIN Jun1()
Received:
2019-06-18
Online:
2020-03-26
Published:
2020-05-25
摘要:
采用学习-测验两任务范式, 通过3项实验探讨了社会行为的效价信息对注意捕获的影响。在学习阶段, 被试观看具有积极效价的帮助行为(某智能体帮助另一智能体爬山)和消极效价的阻碍行为(某智能体阻碍另一智能体爬山), 以及与各自运动特性匹配的无社会交互行为, 其目的为建立不同智能体颜色与社会行为效价信息的联结关系。在测验阶段, 则分别检验社会行为中的施动方(帮助者和阻碍者)颜色和受动方(被帮助者和被阻碍者)颜色的注意捕获效应。结果发现, 消极社会行为中施动方颜色和受动方颜色均更容易捕获注意, 而积极社会行为效价信息并没有改变联结特征值的注意捕获效应; 且相比于受动方, 与消极社会行为效价建立联结的施动方颜色的注意捕获效应更强。该结果提示, 存在消极社会行为效价驱动的注意捕获, 且消极的效价信息与卷入社会行为所有个体的特征建立联结, 但该联结中施动方物理特征具有更高的注意优先性。这一发现暗示, 声誉信息与对社会交互行为的整体表征可能综合作用于对社会交互事件的注意选择。
中图分类号:
郑旭涛, 郭文姣, 陈满, 金佳, 尹军. (2020). 社会行为的效价信息对注意捕获的影响:基于帮助和阻碍行为的探讨. 心理学报, 52(5), 584-596.
ZHENG Xutao, GUO Wenjiao, CHEN Man, JIN Jia, YIN Jun. (2020). Influence of the valence of social actions on attentional capture: Focus on helping and hindering actions. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 52(5), 584-596.
视频版本 | “有帮助” 事件 | “无帮助” 事件 | “有阻碍” 事件 | “无阻碍” 事件 |
---|---|---|---|---|
版本一 | 绿色 | 黄色 | 青色 | 紫色 |
版本二 | 黄色 | 绿色 | 紫色 | 青色 |
版本三 | 青色 | 紫色 | 绿色 | 黄色 |
版本四 | 紫色 | 青色 | 黄色 | 绿色 |
表1 实验1视频中施动方的颜色
视频版本 | “有帮助” 事件 | “无帮助” 事件 | “有阻碍” 事件 | “无阻碍” 事件 |
---|---|---|---|---|
版本一 | 绿色 | 黄色 | 青色 | 紫色 |
版本二 | 黄色 | 绿色 | 紫色 | 青色 |
版本三 | 青色 | 紫色 | 绿色 | 黄色 |
版本四 | 紫色 | 青色 | 黄色 | 绿色 |
视频版本 | 施动方 | 受动方 |
---|---|---|
版本一 | 青色 | 黄色 |
版本二 | 黄色 | 青色 |
表2 实验3视频中施动方、受动方的颜色
视频版本 | 施动方 | 受动方 |
---|---|---|
版本一 | 青色 | 黄色 |
版本二 | 黄色 | 青色 |
[1] |
Achterberg M., van Duijvenvoorde A. C. K., Bakermans- Kranenburg M. J., & Crone E. A . (2016). Control your anger! The neural basis of aggression regulation in response to negative social feedback. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 11(5), 712-720.
doi: 10.1093/scan/nsv154 URL pmid: 26755768 |
[2] |
Anderson B. A . (2013). A value-driven mechanism of attentional selection. Journal of Vision, 13(3), 7.
doi: 10.1167/13.3.7 URL pmid: 23589803 |
[3] |
Anderson B. A . (2015). Value-driven attentional priority is context specific. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(3), 750-756.
doi: 10.3758/s13423-014-0724-0 URL pmid: 25199468 |
[4] |
Anderson B. A . (2016a). The attention habit: How reward learning shapes attentional selection. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1369(1), 24-39.
doi: 10.1111/nyas.12957 URL pmid: 26595376 |
[5] |
Anderson B. A . (2016b). Social reward shapes attentional biases. Cognitive Neuroscience, 7(1-4), 30-36.
doi: 10.1080/17588928.2015.1047823 URL pmid: 25941868 |
[6] |
Anderson B. A . (2017). Counterintuitive effects of negative social feedback on attention. Cognition and Emotion, 31(3), 590-597.
doi: 10.1080/02699931.2015.1122576 URL pmid: 26744037 |
[7] |
Anderson B. A., Laurent P. A., & Yantis S . (2011). Value-driven attentional capture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(25), 10367-10371.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1104047108 URL |
[8] |
Anderson B. A., Laurent P. A., & Yantis S . (2012). Generalization of value-based attentional priority. Visual Cognition, 20(6), 647-658.
doi: 10.1080/13506285.2012.679711 URL |
[9] |
Baumeister R. F., Bratslavsky E., Finkenauer C., & Vohs K. D . (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323-370.
doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323 URL |
[10] |
Beston P. J., Barbet C., Heerey E. A., & Thierry G . (2018). Social feedback interferes with implicit rule learning: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 18(6), 1248-1258.
doi: 10.3758/s13415-018-0635-z URL pmid: 30191470 |
[11] |
Buon M., Jacob P., Loissel E., & Dupoux E . (2013). A non- mentalistic cause-based heuristic in human social evaluations. Cognition, 126(2), 149-155.
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.09.006 URL pmid: 23177140 |
[12] |
Camilleri J. A., Kuhlmeier V. A., & Chu J. Y. Y . (2010). Remembering helpers and hinderers depends on behavioral intentions of the agent and psychopathic characteristics of the observer. Evolutionary Psychology, 8(2), 303-316.
URL pmid: 22947799 |
[13] | Cohen J . (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. |
[14] | Connor C. E., Egeth H. E., & Yantis S . (2004). Visual attention: Bottom-up versus top-down. Current Biology, 14(19), 850-852. |
[15] |
Cushman F . (2008). Crime and punishment: Distinguishing the roles of causal and intentional analyses in moral judgment. Cognition, 108(2), 353-380.
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.03.006 URL pmid: 18439575 |
[16] |
Desimone R., & Duncan J . (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18(1), 193-222.
doi: 10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.001205 URL |
[17] |
Ding X., Gao Z., & Shen M . (2017). Two equals one: Two human actions during social interaction are grouped as one unit in working memory. Psychological Science, 28(9), 1311-1320.
doi: 10.1177/0956797617707318 URL pmid: 28719763 |
[18] |
Earley R. L . (2010). Social eavesdropping and the evolution of conditional cooperation and cheating strategies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 365(1553), 2675-2686.
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0147 URL pmid: 20679111 |
[19] |
Egeth H. E., & Yantis S . (1997). Visual attention: Control, representation, and time course. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 269-297.
doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.269 URL pmid: 9046562 |
[20] |
Fehr E., & Fischbacher U . (2004). Third-party punishment and social norms. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25(2), 63-87.
doi: 10.1016/S1090-5138(04)00005-4 URL |
[21] |
Folk C. L., Remington R. W., & Johnston J. C . (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(4), 1030-1044.
URL pmid: 1431742 |
[22] |
Frith C. D., & Frith U . (2012). Mechanisms of social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 287-313.
doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100449 URL |
[23] |
Guglielmo S., Monroe A. E., & Malle B. F . (2009). At the heart of morality lies folk psychology. Inquiry, 52(5), 449-466.
doi: 10.1093/scan/nsw077 URL pmid: 27317926 |
[24] |
Hamlin J. K . (2015). The case for social evaluation in preverbal infants: gazing toward one's goal drives infants' preferences for helpers over hinderers in the hill paradigm. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 563
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00563 URL pmid: 24971067 |
[25] |
Hamlin J. K., Wynn K., & Bloom P . (2007). Social evaluation by preverbal infants. Nature, 450(7169), 557-559.
doi: 10.1038/nature06288 URL pmid: 18033298 |
[26] |
Lavie N . (2005). Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(2), 75-82.
doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.004 URL pmid: 15668100 |
[27] |
Leber A. B . (2010). Neural predictors of within-subject fluctuations in attentional control. Journal of Neuroscience, 30(34), 11458-11465.
doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0809-10.2010 URL pmid: 20739567 |
[28] |
Liu Y., Li L., Zheng L., & Guo X . (2017). Punish the perpetrator or compensate the victim? Gain vs. Loss context modulate third-party altruistic behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 75-84.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00075 URL pmid: 28194127 |
[29] |
Kobayashi K., & Hsu M . (2019). Common neural code for reward and information value. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(26), 13061-13066.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1820145116 URL pmid: 31186358 |
[30] |
Kurzban R., DeScioli P., & O'Brien E . (2007). Audience effects on moralistic punishment. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(2), 75-84.
doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.06.001 URL |
[31] |
Milinski M . (2016). Reputation, a universal currency for human social interactions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 371(1687).
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0100 URL pmid: 26729939 |
[32] |
Milinski M., Semmann D., Bakker T. C. M., & Krambeck H. J . (2001). Cooperation through indirect reciprocity: Image scoring or standing strategy? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 268(1484), 2495-2501.
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1809 URL pmid: 11747570 |
[33] |
Mineka S., & Ohman A . (2002). Phobias and preparedness: The selective, automatic, and encapsulated nature of fear. Biological Psychiatry, 52(10), 927-937.
doi: 10.1016/s0006-3223(02)01669-4 URL pmid: 12437934 |
[34] |
Olsson A., Nearing K. I., & Phelps E. A . (2007). Learning fears by observing others: the neural systems of social fear transmission. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2(1), 3-11.
doi: 10.1093/scan/nsm005 URL pmid: 18985115 |
[35] |
Posner M. I . (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(1), 3-25.Premack, D., & Premack, A. J. (1997). Infants attribute value± to the goal-directed actions of self-propelled objects. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9(6), 848-856.
doi: 10.1080/00335558008248231 URL pmid: 7367577 |
[36] |
Rendell L., Boyd R., Cownden D., Enquist M., Eriksson K., Feldman M. W., … Laland K. N . (2010). Why copy others? Insights from the social learning strategies tournament. Science, 328(5975), 208-213.
doi: 10.1126/science.1184719 URL pmid: 20378813 |
[37] |
Reynolds J. H., Chelazzi L., & Desimone R . (1999). Competitive mechanisms subserve attention in macaque areas V2 and V4. Journal of Neuroscience, 19(5), 1736-1753.
URL pmid: 10024360 |
[38] |
Rozin P., & Royzman E. B . (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(4), 296-320.
doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2 URL |
[39] |
Sali A. W., Anderson B. A., & Yantis S . (2014). The role of reward prediction in the control of attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(4), 1654-1664.
doi: 10.1037/a0037267 URL pmid: 24955700 |
[40] |
Semmann D., Krambeck H. J., & Milinski M . (2005). Reputation is valuable within and outside one’s own social group. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 57(6), 611-616.
doi: 10.1007/s00265-004-0885-3 URL |
[41] |
Theeuwes J . (1994). Stimulus-driven capture and attentional set: Selective search for color and visual abrupt onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(4), 799-806.
doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.20.4.799 URL pmid: 8083635 |
[42] |
Theeuwes J . (2010). Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica, 135(2), 77-99.
doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.006 URL pmid: 20507828 |
[43] |
Wedekind C., & Milinski M . (2000). Cooperation through image scoring in humans. Science, 288(5467), 850-852.
doi: 10.1126/science.288.5467.850 URL pmid: 10797005 |
[44] |
Wentura D., Muller P., & Rothermund K . (2014). Attentional capture by evaluative stimuli: Gain- and loss-connoting colors boost the additional-singleton effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(3), 701-707.
doi: 10.3758/s13423-013-0531-z URL pmid: 24488806 |
[45] |
Yantis S., & Jonides J . (1984). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Evidence from visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10(5), 601-621.
doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.10.5.601 URL pmid: 6238122 |
[46] |
Yin J., Xu H., Duan J., & Shen M . (2018). Object-based attention on social units: Visual selection of hands performing a social interaction. Psychological Science, 29(7), 1040-1048.
doi: 10.1177/0956797617749636 URL pmid: 29741989 |
[47] |
Young L., Cushman F., Hauser M., & Saxe R . (2007). The neural basis of the interaction between theory of mind and moral judgment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(20), 8235-8240.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.0701408104 URL pmid: 17485679 |
[1] | 蒯玲, 卫海英, 姚琦, 肖婷文, 谢升成. 时间标志对炫耀性亲社会行为意愿的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2025, 57(4): 526-543. |
[2] | 李卉, 刘思懿, 庞怡. 社交机器人对3~5岁儿童分享行为的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2025, 57(4): 573-583. |
[3] | 李曦, 纪林芹, 迟晓慧, 王舒冉, 张文新, 曹衍淼. 多巴胺系统基因调节青少年同伴拒绝与亲社会行为关系: 平行潜增长模型[J]. 心理学报, 2025, 57(4): 584-598. |
[4] | 聂衍刚, 陈沛, 王林欣, 喻承甫, 利振华. 父母情感温暖、自我控制与青少年亲社会行为的关系: 多基因的调节作用及父母差异[J]. 心理学报, 2025, 57(4): 599-613. |
[5] | 韩宪国, 金国敏, 李丹, 刘世宏, 吴琴, 刘俊升, 陈欣银. 父母温暖与儿童晚期亲社会行为的关系: 集体取向的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2025, 57(4): 614-630. |
[6] | 林荣茂, 余巧华, 胡添祥, 张九妹, 叶玉珊, 连榕. 敬畏感与亲社会行为关系的三水平和结构方程模型元分析[J]. 心理学报, 2025, 57(4): 631-651. |
[7] | 孙瑾, 杨静舒. 互惠利他的先行优势:品牌的互惠角色影响消费者亲社会行为[J]. 心理学报, 2025, 57(2): 315-330. |
[8] | 王天鸿, 金珊, 程子鹏, 娄宇, 谢晓非. 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[J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(9): 1210-1224. |
[9] | 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. |
[10] | 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. |
[11] | 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. |
[12] | 张环, 王晨, 李俊霞, 林琳, 吴捷. 情绪效价和动机强度对社会分享型提取诱发遗忘的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(8): 999-1014. |
[13] | 倪丹, 郑晓明. 同事帮助行为对观察者的人际影响:基于社会比较理论[J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(8): 1125-1140. |
[14] | 刘新燕, 伍海兰, 涂菊, 王璐. 一心多用的双刃剑效应:多任务对亲社会行为的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(12): 1800-1820. |
[15] | 赵纤, 胡义秋, 黎志华. 脱贫家庭青少年社会流动信念与亲社会行为的纵向发展关系:城乡差异的调节作用[J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(11): 1499-1511. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||