嫉妒与幸福感因果机制：基于追踪和日记法研究

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.00040

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

追求幸福是人类永恒的主题。尽管影响幸福的因素很多, 但社会比较是影响个体幸福感最普遍的因素。基于社会比较理论视角, 分别采用纵向追踪研究和日记法研究探讨了向上社会比较中典型情绪——嫉妒与幸福感的因果关系机制, 并首次尝试建立了嫉妒与一般主观幸福感(SWB, Subject Well-being)因子的循环假设理论模型。在研究1中, 对290名参与者进行间隔1年的两次(T1和T2)追踪调查, 探讨特质嫉妒与主观幸福感双因子模型之间的关系。研究结果显示：(1) T1的特质嫉妒可以显著正向预测T2的消极情感(NA, Negative Affect)和SWB因子, 显著负向预测T2的积极情感(PA, Positive Affect)和生活满意度(LS, Life Satisfaction); (2) T1的一般SWB因子负向预测T2的特质嫉妒。在研究2中, 进一步采用日记法对178名参与者进行了持续14天的研究, 结果发现每日嫉妒仅能正向预测主观幸福感双因子中的NA。首次基于社会比较的理论视角, 采用多方法学视角深入揭示了嫉妒与主观幸福感的PA、NA和LS之间的复杂因果关系机制, 弥补了学术界在相关领域的不足。更重要的是, 还首次自主提出了嫉妒与一般SWB因子的循环假设理论模型, 对从社会比较理论视角去拓展、理解、重评SWB的社会基础提供了较新的思路。

关键词: 嫉妒, 主观幸福感, 双因子模型, 追踪法, 日记法

Abstract:

With the rise of the Internet and the popularity of mobile phones, sharing life and flaunting happiness on Facebook and WeChat has gradually become the norm, which easily induces upward social comparison and leads to the generalization of envy. So, is there a predictive causal mechanism between envy and subjective well-being (SWB)? To the best of our knowledge, there is no in-depth study on this issue at present. Thus, based on the perspective of social comparison theory, this study used a longitudinal study and a diary method to systematically to explore the causal mechanism between dispositional envy and subjective well-being.
A two-wave longitudinal study with the time interval of one year and a fourteen-day diary survey were conducted to test our hypotheses. Specifically, a sample of 307 young students participated in a two-wave study including the measurements of dispositional envy and SWB. We employed structural equation modelling techniques to assess cross-lagged effects between envy and the bi-factor structure of SWB [i.e., life satisfaction (LS), negative affect (NA), positive affect (PA) and the general SWB factor (gSWB)] in four models. On the other hand, a sample of 178 young students was selected by cluster sampling method. After a fourteen-day diary survey, we used HLM 6.08 to construct a hierarchical linear model to study the effects of daily envy on daily PA, NA and LS, and then we tested the mutual prediction between effect of daily envy and subjective well-being with amos24.0, latent growth curve model (LGCM) and structural equation model (SEM).
The results of the longitudinal study showed that the dispositional envy of young students can positively predict NA (β = 0.54, p = 0.003) and gSWB (β = 0.81, p = 0.032), and negatively predict PA (β = -0.73, p = 0.011) and LS (β = -0.82, p = 0.016) in a long period of time. The result of the diary method indicated that the envy of the previous day could only positively predict NA of the next day in the bi-factor model of subjective well-being in a short period of time. That means the dispositional envy of young students can only positively predict their own NA. We also found that PA, NA and LS of the previous day can all predict the envy of the next day. Besides, the result of this study showed that there was an interaction between envy and gSWB, in which envy can positively predict gSWB (β = 0.81, p = 0.032) and gSWB can negatively predict envy (β = -0.17, p = 0.047).
In conclusion, based on the theoretical perspective of social comparison, this study deeply reveals the complex causal mechanism between envy and PA, NA, LS of SWB from a longitudinal study and a diary method. In addition, on the basis of this finding, we put forward a circular hypothesis model of envy and gSWB for the first time, which provides a new perspective for exploring the predictive causal relationship between envy and SWB from the perspective of social comparison theory, and a new way for improving young students’ well-being.

Key words: envy, subjective well-being, bi-factor model, longitudinal study, diary method

中图分类号:

B848

向燕辉, 何佳丽, 李清银. (2022). 嫉妒与幸福感因果机制：基于追踪和日记法研究. 心理学报, 54(1), 40-53.

XIANG Yanhui, HE Jiali, LI Qingyin. (2022). The causal mechanism between envy and subjective well-being: Based on a longitudinal study and a diary method. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 54(1), 40-53.

图/表 13

参考文献 50

[1]	Alauddin, F., Blum, R. W., Diallo, I., Djaelani, J., Ghose, S., Gupta, G. R., ... Zarrouk, A. M. (1999). Programming for adolescent health and development. World Health Organization Technical Report, 886, i.
[2]	Ateca-Amestoy, V., Aguilar, A. C., & Moro-Egido, A. I. (2014). Social interactions and life satisfaction: Evidence from Latin America. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(3), 527- 554. doi: 10.1007/s10902-013-9434-y URL
[3]	Busseri, M. A., & Sadava, S. W. (2011). A review of the tripartite structure of subjective well-being: Implications for conceptualization, operationalization, analysis, and synthesis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(3), 290-314. doi: 10.1177/1088868310391271 URL
[4]	Casu, G. (2015). Envy: A Psychometric Refinement of the Construct. [Dissertation thesis]. Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna. Dottorato di ricerca in Scienze psicologiche, 27 Ciclo.
[5]	Chan, K., & Prendergast, G. (2007). Materialism and social comparison among adolescents. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 35(2), 213-228. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2007.35.2.213 URL
[6]	Chen, F. F., Jing, Y., Hayes, A., & Lee, J. M. (2013). Two concepts or two approaches? A bifactor analysis of psychological and subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(3), 1033-1068. doi: 10.1007/s10902-012-9367-x URL
[7]	Davey, A., & Savla, J. (2015). Statistical power analysis with missing data: A structural equation modeling approach. Routledge Academic, 1-386.
[8]	Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55(1), 34-43. pmid: 11392863
[9]	Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71-75. pmid: 16367493
[10]	Diener, E., & Ryan, K. (2009). Subjective well-being: A general overview. South African Journal of Psychology, 39(4), 391-406. doi: 10.1177/008124630903900402 URL
[11]	Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276-302. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276 URL
[12]	Dogan, K., & Vecchio, R. P. (2001). Managing envy and jealousy in the workplace. Compensation & Benefits Review, 33(2), 57-64.
[13]	Dvash, J., Gilam, G., Ben-Ze’ev, A., Hendler, T., & Shamay- Tsoory, S. G. (2010). The envious brain: The neural basis of social comparison. Human Brain Mapping, 31(11), 1741- 1750.
[14]	Extremera, N., Salguero, J. M., & Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2011). Trait meta-mood and subjective happiness: A 7-week prospective study. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(3), 509-517. doi: 10.1007/s10902-010-9233-7 URL
[15]	Gilbert, D. T., Giesler, R. B., & Morris, K. A. (1995). When comparisons arise. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 69(2), 227-236.
[16]	Gunthert, K. C., & Wenze, S. J. (2012). Daily diary methods. In M. R. Mehl & T. S. Conner (Eds.), Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (pp.144-159). The Guilford Press.
[17]	Habimana, E., & Massé, L. (2000). Envy manifestations and personality disorders. European Psychiatry, 15, 15-21. doi: 10.1016/S0924-9338(00)00501-0 URL
[18]	Holzinger, K. J., & Swineford, F. (1937). The bi-factor method. Psychometrika, 2(1), 41-54. doi: 10.1007/BF02287965 URL
[19]	Hu, L.-t., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424- 453. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424 URL
[20]	Jovanović, V. (2015). A bifactor model of subjective well-being: A re-examination of the structure of subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 45- 49. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.07.026 URL
[21]	Kehayes, I.-L. L., & Mackinnon, S. P. (2019). Investigating the relationship between perfectionistic self-presentation and social anxiety using daily diary methods: A replication. Collabra: Psychology, 5(1), 33. doi: 10.1525/collabra.257 URL
[22]	Kleiber, D. A., Hutchinson, S. L., & Williams, R. (2002). Leisure as a resource in transcending negative life events: Self-protection, self-restoration, and personal transformation. Leisure Sciences, 24(2), 219-235.
[23]	Krasnova, H., Wenninger, H., Widjaja, T., & Buxmann, P. (2013). Envy on facebook: A hidden threat to users' life satisfaction?. Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
[24]	Krekels, G., & Pandelaere, M. (2015). Dispositional greed. Personality and Individual Differences, 74, 225-230. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2014.10.036 URL
[25]	Li, Y. (2019). Upward social comparison and depression in social network settings: The roles of envy and self-efficacy. Internet Research, 29(1), 46-59. doi: 10.1108/IntR-09-2017-0358 URL
[26]	Lin, R., & Utz, S. (2015). The emotional responses of browsing Facebook: Happiness, envy, and the role of tie strength. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 29-38. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.064 URL
[27]	Lu, Q. (2016). A Model of Workplace Envy and Well-being. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2016(1), 15509.
[28]	Miao, M., Zheng, L., & Gan, Y. (2017). Meaning in Life Promotes Proactive Coping via Positive Affect: A Daily Diary Study. Journal of Happiness Studies, 18(6), 1683-1696.
[29]	Morgan, G. B., Hodge, K. J., Wells, K. E., & Watkins, M. W. (2015). Are fit indices biased in favor of bi-factor models in cognitive ability research?: A comparison of fit in correlated factors, higher-order, and bi-factor models via Monte Carlo simulations. Journal of Intelligence, 3(1), 2- 20. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence3010002 URL
[30]	Ng, J. C. K., Lau, V. C. Y., & Chen, S. X. (2020). Why are dispositional enviers not satisfied with their lives? An investigation of intrapersonal and interpersonal pathways among adolescents and young adults. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21(2), 525-545. doi: 10.1007/s10902-019-00094-x URL
[31]	Parrott, W. G., & Smith, R. H. (1993). Distinguishing the experiences of envy and jealousy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(6), 906-920. pmid: 8326472
[32]	Rook, K. S. (2001). Emotional health and positive versus negative social exchanges: A daily diary analysis. Applied Developmental Science, 5(2), 86-97. doi: 10.1207/S1532480XADS0502_4 URL
[33]	Sirgy, M. J. (2020). Positive balance at the emotional level: Hedonic well-being. Positive Balance (pp.41-52).
[34]	Smith, R. H., & Kim, S. H. (2007). Comprehending envy. Psychological Bulletin, 133(1), 46-64. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.46 URL
[35]	Smith, R. H., Parrott, W. G., Diener, E. F., Hoyle, R. H., & Kim, S. H. (1999). Dispositional envy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(8), 1007-1020. doi: 10.1177/01461672992511008 URL
[36]	Solomon, R. C., & Stone, L. D. (2002). On “positive” and “negative” emotions. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 32(4), 417-435. doi: 10.1111/jtsb.2002.32.issue-4 URL
[37]	Suls, J., Martin, R., & Wheeler, L. (2002). Social comparison: Why, with whom, and with what effect? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(5), 159-163. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00191 URL
[38]	Uchida, Y., & Ogihara, Y. (2012). Personal or interpersonal construal of happiness: A cultural psychological perspective. International Journal of Wellbeing, 2(4), 354-369.
[39]	van de Ven, N., Zeelenberg, M., & Pieters, R. (2009). Leveling up and down: The experiences of benign and malicious envy. Emotion, 9(3), 419-429. doi: 10.1037/a0015669 URL
[40]	Vogel, E. A., Rose, J. P., Roberts, L. R., & Eckles, K. (2014). Social comparison, social media, and self-esteem. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 3(4), 206-222. doi: 10.1037/ppm0000047 URL
[41]	Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1984). Negative affectivity: The disposition to experience aversive emotional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96(3), 465-490. pmid: 6393179
[42]	Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063-1070. pmid: 3397865
[43]	Wenninger, H., Cheung, C. M. K., & Krasnova, H. (2019). College-aged users behavioral strategies to reduce envy on social networking sites: A cross-cultural investigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 97, 10-23. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.02.025
[44]	Wolff, J. K., Schmiedek, F., Brose, A., & Lindenberger, U. (2013). Physical and emotional well-being and the balance of needed and received emotional support: Age differences in a daily diary study. Social Science & Medicine, 91, 67-75. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.04.033 URL
[45]	Xiang, Y., Chao, X., & Ye, Y. (2018). Effect of gratitude on benign and malicious envy: The mediating role of social support. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9, 139. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00139 URL
[46]	Xiang, Y., Dong, X., & Zhao, J. (2020). Effects of envy on depression: The mediating roles of psychological resilience and social support. Psychiatry Investigation, 17(6), 547-555. doi: 10.30773/pi.2019.0266 URL
[47]	Xiang, Y., & Yuan, R. (2020). Why do people with high dispositional gratitude tend to experience high life satisfaction? A broaden-and-build theory perspective. Journal of Happiness Studies, 22(3), 1-14. doi: 10.1007/s10902-019-00216-5 URL
[48]	Xiang, Y., Yuan, R., & Zhao, J. (2020). Childhood maltreatment and life satisfaction in adulthood: The mediating effect of emotional intelligence, positive affect and negative affect. Journal of Health Psychology, (8), 135910532091438.
[49]	Yang, K., Yan, W., Jia, N., Wang, Q., & Kong, F. (2020). Longitudinal relationship between trait gratitude and subjective well-being in adolescents: Evidence from the bi-factor model. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1-9.
[50]	Zhou, H., & Long, L. (2004). Statistical remedies for common method biases. Advances in Psychological Science, 12(6), 942-950.
	[ 周浩, 龙立荣. (2004). 共同方法偏差的统计检验与控制方法. 心理科学进展, 12(6), 942-950.]

统计指标	Envy	PA	NA	LS
Cohen's d	0.33	-0.21	-0.04	-0.11
Effect Size (r)	0.16	-0.10	-0.02	-0.05
F	3.65	0.01	1.93	0.53
p	0.05	0.93	0.17	0.47

统计指标	Envy	PA	NA	LS
Cohen's d	0.33	-0.21	-0.04	-0.11
Effect Size (r)	0.16	-0.10	-0.02	-0.05
F	3.65	0.01	1.93	0.53
p	0.05	0.93	0.17	0.47

变量	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1. PAT1	-
2. NAT1	0.13^*	-
3. LST1	0.31^**	-0.20^**	-
4. EnvyT1	-0.19^**	0.32^**	-0.26^**	-
5. PAT2	0.49^**	0.00	0.18^**	-0.19^**	-
6. NAT2	0.06	0.36^**	-0.12^*	0.31^**	-0.03	-
7. LST2	0.21^**	-0.13^*	0.40^**	-0.19^**	0.35^**	-0.27^**	-
8. EnvyT2	-0.10	0.20^**	-0.20^**	0.54^**	-0.23^**	0.48^**	-0.22^**	-
M	29.46	18.89	19.39	17.63	31.04	19.12	20.00	15.91
SD	7.65	5.82	5.57	5.00	7.62	5.96	5.94	5.46

变量	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1. PAT1	-
2. NAT1	0.13^*	-
3. LST1	0.31^**	-0.20^**	-
4. EnvyT1	-0.19^**	0.32^**	-0.26^**	-
5. PAT2	0.49^**	0.00	0.18^**	-0.19^**	-
6. NAT2	0.06	0.36^**	-0.12^*	0.31^**	-0.03	-
7. LST2	0.21^**	-0.13^*	0.40^**	-0.19^**	0.35^**	-0.27^**	-
8. EnvyT2	-0.10	0.20^**	-0.20^**	0.54^**	-0.23^**	0.48^**	-0.22^**	-
M	29.46	18.89	19.39	17.63	31.04	19.12	20.00	15.91
SD	7.65	5.82	5.57	5.00	7.62	5.96	5.94	5.46

Model	χ²	df	RMSEA	SRMR	CFI	TLI	Comparison	Δχ²	Δdf
Model 1	376.03	148	0.07	0.14	0.94	0.93
Model 2	340.86	146	0.07	0.11	0.95	0.94	M1-M2	35.17	2
Model 3	369.10	146	0.07	0.13	0.95	0.93	M1-M3	6.93	2
Model 4	337.66	142	0.07	0.11	0.95	0.94	M1-M4	38.37	6