联结还是疏离：探究疫情死亡凸显对亲社会意愿的影响及其作用机制

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.0652

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

疫情死亡凸显的两个方面可能对亲社会意愿有相反作用：疫情凸显启动行为免疫降低亲社会意愿; 死亡凸显启动文化世界观防御提升亲社会意愿。新冠大流行期间, 本研究发现：相比控制组的疫情亲社会意愿, 经典/地震死亡凸显组有提升, 而疫情死亡凸显组无显著差别, 提示疫情凸显削弱了死亡凸显提升亲社会意愿的倾向; 相比控制组的疫情面对面亲社会意愿, 疫情非死亡凸显组有降低, 而疫情死亡凸显组无显著差别, 提示疫情面对面情境中死亡凸显削弱了疫情凸显降低亲社会意愿的倾向, 支持假设。疫情结束后, 本研究发现：对疫情面对面亲社会意愿而言, 疫情死亡凸显、疫情非死亡凸显和控制组无显著差异, 但观测到行为免疫的中介作用; 对非疫情亲社会意愿而言, 疫情死亡凸显组高于控制组(边缘显著), 提示在后疫情时代或当亲社会缘由与疫情无关时, 疫情凸显对亲社会意愿的降低作用有所削弱, 死亡凸显对亲社会意愿的提升作用得以显现; 对非疫情亲社会行为而言, 疫情死亡凸显、疫情非死亡凸显和控制组无显著差异, 提示本研究中对非疫情亲社会意愿的凸显效应不能直接推广至非疫情亲社会行为。总之, 本研究分离了疫情凸显和死亡凸显对亲社会意愿的影响, 揭示了其在不同社会时期的不同模式。

关键词: 疫情凸显, 死亡凸显, 亲社会意愿

Abstract:

Research has found that mortality salience leads to increased engagement with a cultural worldview, as reflected in heightened prosocial intentions. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the influence of mortality salience on prosocial intention may be distinct. Pandemic mortality salience encompasses information from both pandemic and mortality saliences, with each representing a distinct facet. We hypothesized two opposing mechanisms: On one hand, pandemic salience activates the behavioral immune system, prompting individuals to avoid potential pathogen threats and consequently reducing their prosocial intention. On the other hand, mortality salience initiates cultural worldview defense, prompting individuals to identify with group beliefs and universal values, thus promoting prosocial intentions.

Experiment 1 compared typical mortality salience (TMS) and pandemic mortality salience (PMS) conditions to pain salience (PS) control condition. We hypothesized that pandemic salience weakens mortality salience’s effect on promoting prosocial intention. Consequently, we expected that unlike in the TMS condition, pandemic prosocial intention (prosocial intention in pandemic scenarios) in the PMS condition would not significantly increase compared to the PS control condition. However, Experiment 1 was limited in that the TMS and PMS differed in nature, with the latter being more contextually oriented. Hence, Experiment 2 aimed to replicate the findings of Experiment 1 by replacing the TMS condition with the earthquake mortality salience (EMS) condition. Experiment 3 explored whether mortality salience also diminishes the effect of pandemic salience on reducing prosocial intention by comparing prosocial intention under the pandemic non-mortality salience (PNMS), PMS, and PS conditions. As the resource allocation task used to measure prosocial intention in Experiments 1 and 2 potentially led to lower ecological validity, Experiment 3 enhanced the measurement of prosocial intention by assessing volunteer willingness in two scenarios: with and without face-to-face interaction. Experiments 1-3 were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, and Experiment 5 was partially repeated in Experiment 3 in the post-pandemic era. Furthermore, Experiment 6 explored the effects of salience types on non-pandemic prosocial behavior (prosocial behavior unrelated to the pandemic). Experiment 4 served as a control experiment to assess the effectiveness of the salience manipulations.

The results of Experiments 1 and 2 showed that compared to the PS control condition, pandemic prosocial intention increased in the TMS and EMS conditions, but not in the PMS condition. This suggests that pandemic salience in the PMS might attenuate the effect of mortality salience in promoting prosocial intention. Experiment 3 revealed that in face-to-face scenarios, participants in the PNMS condition exhibited a lower willingness to help than those in either the PS control or PMS condition, with no significant difference between the PS control and PMS conditions. These results suggest that mortality salience in the PMS may also weaken the effect of pandemic salience on reducing prosocial intention, thus confirming the initial hypothesis. In Experiment 5 (data collected after the end of the COVID-19 pandemic), there were no significant differences in pandemic prosocial intention among the PNMS, PMS, and PS conditions. However, a mediating effect of the behavioral immune system was observed. Furthermore, for non-pandemic prosocial intention, the PMS group showed higher levels than the control group (with marginal significance), suggesting that in the post-pandemic era, or when prosocial nature was unrelated to the pandemic, the reducing effect of pandemic salience on prosocial intention weakened, whereas the enhancing effect of mortality salience on prosocial intention became evident. Experiment 6 revealed no significant differences in non-pandemic prosocial behavior between the PNMS, PMS, and PS conditions, suggesting that the effects of salience types on non-pandemic prosocial intention in this study cannot be directly generalized to non-pandemic prosocial behavior.

In conclusion, this study separated the effects of mortality and pandemic salience on prosocial intention and revealed that these effects manifest differently across different societal periods.

Key words: pandemic salience, mortality salience, prosocial intention

中图分类号:

B849

孟鲁, 田宇浩, 王海飞, 董佳一, 蔺星儒, 籍宏伟, 田启瑞, 周梁. (2025). 联结还是疏离：探究疫情死亡凸显对亲社会意愿的影响及其作用机制. 心理学报, 57(4), 652-670.

MENG Lu, TIAN Yuhao, WANG Haifei, DONG Jiayi, LIN Xingru, JI Hongwei, TIAN Qirui, ZHOU Liang. (2025). Connecting or isolating: Investigating the influence of pandemic mortality salience on prosocial intention. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(4), 652-670.

图/表 10

图1 实验1中的疫情亲社会意愿：凸显类型和接受者身份对独裁者游戏分配分数的影响注：TMS、PMS和PSC分别代表经典死亡凸显组、疫情死亡凸显组和疼痛凸显控制组; **代表pcorrected < 0.01, *代表pcorrected < 0.05, 误差线代表相应条件下的标准误。

图2 实验2中的疫情亲社会意愿：凸显类型和接受者身份对独裁者游戏分配分数的影响注：EMS、PMS和PSC分别代表地震死亡凸显组、疫情死亡凸显组和疼痛凸显控制组; **代表pcorrected < 0.01, 误差线代表相应条件下的标准误。

图3 实验3中的疫情亲社会意愿：凸显类型和帮助情境对志愿者意愿的影响注：PNMS、PMS和PSC分别代表疫情非死亡凸显组、疫情死亡凸显组和疼痛凸显控制组。FTF代表面对面的亲社会情境, non-FTF代表非面对面的亲社会情境。*代表pcorrected < 0.05, 误差线代表相应条件下的标准误。

图4 实验4中凸显类型对死亡想法、行为免疫、物资紧缺感的影响注：PMS、EMS和PNMS分别代表疫情死亡凸显组、地震死亡凸显组和疫情非死亡凸显组。***代表pcorrected < 0.001, **代表pcorrected < 0.01, *代表pcorrected < 0.05, 误差线代表相应条件下的标准误。

图5 实验5中凸显类型对死亡想法、行为免疫、物资紧缺感的影响注：PNMS、PMS、PSC分别代表疫情非死亡凸显组、疫情死亡凸显组、疼痛凸显控制组; ***代表pcorrected < 0.001, 误差线代表相应条件下的标准误。

图6 实验5中凸显类型对恐惧情绪、悲伤情绪的影响注：PNMS、PMS、PSC分别代表疫情非死亡凸显组、疫情死亡凸显组、疼痛凸显控制组。***代表pcorrected < 0.001, 误差线代表相应条件下的标准误。

表1 死亡想法、行为免疫、物资紧缺感与亲社会意愿的偏相关矩阵

变量	疫情面对面亲社会意愿	非疫情亲社会意愿
死亡想法	−0.03	0.11
行为免疫	−0.20^*	0.13
物资紧缺感	−0.03	−0.05

图7 行为免疫在凸显类型与疫情面对面亲社会意愿间的中介效应分析示意图注：凸显类型以疼痛凸显控制组为参照水平。仅对连续型变量(行为免疫、疫情面对面亲社会意愿)进行标准化处理, 对虚拟变量(凸显类型1、凸显类型2)不进行标准化处理(Hayes, 2022)。***代表pcorrected < 0.001, **代表pcorrected < 0.01。

图8 实验6中凸显类型对死亡想法、行为免疫、物资紧缺感的影响注：PNMS、PMS、PSC分别代表疫情非死亡凸显组、疫情死亡凸显组、疼痛凸显控制组; ***代表pcorrected < 0.001, 误差线代表相应条件下的标准误。

图9 实验6中凸显类型对恐惧情绪、悲伤情绪的影响注：PNMS、PMS、PSC分别代表疫情非死亡凸显组、疫情死亡凸显组、疼痛凸显控制组; ***代表pcorrected < 0.001, **代表pcorrected < 0.01, 误差线代表相应条件下的标准误。

参考文献 51

[1]	Boyd, P., Morris, K. L., & Goldenberg, J. L. (2017). Open to death: A moderating role of openness to experience in terror management. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 71, 117-127.
[2]	Burke, B. L., Martens, A., & Faucher, E. H. (2010). Two decades of terror management theory: A meta-analysis of mortality salience research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(2), 155-195. doi: 10.1177/1088868309352321 pmid: 20097885
[3]	Chierchia, G., Piera Pi-Sunyer, B., & Blakemore, S. -J. (2020). Prosocial influence and opportunistic conformity in adolescents and young adults. Psychological Science, 31(12), 1585-1601. doi: 10.1177/0956797620957625 pmid: 33226891
[4]	Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[5]	Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2006). Prosocial development. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 646-718). John Wiley & Sons.
[6]	Fan, X. Y., Sun, P. Z., Wang, J., & Zhang, H. (2022). Prosocial behavior during the COVID-19 epidemic: The differential impact of death awareness on the willingness to donate money and participate in volunteer service. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 30(2), 267-271+309.
	[范小月, 孙配贞, 王娟, 张洪. (2022). 疫情下的亲社会行为:死亡意识对捐款和志愿服务意愿的差异性影响. 中国临床心理学杂志, 30(2), 267-271+309.]
[7]	Fang, J., Wen, Z. L., & Zhang, M. Q. (2017). Mediation analysis of categorical variables. Journal of Psychological Science, 40(2), 471-477.
	[方杰, 温忠麟, 张敏强. (2017). 类别变量的中介效应分析. 心理科学, 40(2), 471-477.]
[8]	Ge, Y., Lu, C. Y., Shuai, M. Q., Wenger, J. L., Peng, C. H., & Wang, H. (2022). Meaning in life among Chinese undergraduate students in the post-epidemic period: A qualitative interview study. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, 1030148.
[9]	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.
[10]	Greenberg, J., Arndt, J., Simon, L., Pyszczynski, T., & Solomon, S. (2000). Proximal and distal defenses in response to reminders of one’s mortality: Evidence of a temporal sequence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(1), 91-99.
[11]	Greenberg, J., Martens, A., Jonas, E., Eisenstadt, D., Pyszczynski, T., & Solomon, S. (2003). Psychological defense in anticipation of anxiety: Eliminating the potential for anxiety eliminates the effect of mortality salience on worldview defense. Psychological Science, 14(5), 516-519. pmid: 12930486
[12]	Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., & Pyszczynski, T. (1997). Terror management theory of self-esteem and cultural worldviews:Empirical assessments and conceptual refinements. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 29, pp. 61-139). Academic Press.
[13]	Greenberg, J., Vail, K., & Pyszczynski, T. (2014). Terror management theory and research:How the desire for death transcendence drives our strivings for meaning and significance. In A. J. Elliot (Ed), Advances in motivation science (Vol. 1, pp. 85-134). Elsevier.
[14]	Hayes, A. F. (2022). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, Third Edition. New York: Guilford Press.
[15]	Hayes, J., Schimel, J., Arndt, J., & Faucher, E. H. (2010). A theoretical and empirical review of the death-thought accessibility concept in terror management research. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 699-739. doi: 10.1037/a0020524 pmid: 20804234
[16]	Hirschberger, G. (2006). Terror management and attributions of blame to innocent victims: Reconciling compassionate and defensive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(5), 832-844. pmid: 17059304
[17]	Hirschberger, G. (2013). Self-protective altruism. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(2), 128-140.
[18]	Hirschberger, G., Ein-Dor, T., & Almakias, S. (2008). The self-protective altruist: Terror management and the ambivalent nature of prosocial behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(5), 666-678. doi: 10.1177/0146167207313933 pmid: 18303130
[19]	Huang, C. L., & Hu, C. (2023). The terror management and sorrow management of death consciousness. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55(2), 318-335. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.00318
	[黄成利, 胡超. (2023). 死亡意识的恐惧管理和悲伤管理. 心理学报, 55(2), 318-335.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.00318
[20]	Jonas, E., Schimel, J., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (2002). The Scrooge effect: Evidence that mortality salience increases prosocial attitudes and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(10), 1342-1353.
[21]	Klein, R. A., Cook, C. L., Ebersole, C. R., Vitiello, C., Nosek, B. A., Hilgard, J., … Ratliff, K. A. (2022). Many Labs 4: Failure to replicate mortality salience effect with and without original author involvement. Collabra: Psychology, 8(1), Article 35271.
[22]	Lambert, A. J., Eadeh, F. R., Peak, S. A., Scherer, L. D., Schott, J. P., & Slochower, J. M. (2014). Toward a greater understanding of the emotional dynamics of the mortality salience manipulation: Revisiting the “affect-free” claim of terror management research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(5), 655-678. doi: 10.1037/a0036353 pmid: 24749817
[23]	Li, A. M., Peng, Y., Li, B., & Ling, W. Q. (2014). The effects of money priming on pro-social behavior and its decision mechanism. Advances in Psychology, 22(5), 845-856.
	[李爱梅, 彭元, 李斌, 凌文辁. (2014). 金钱概念启动对亲社会行为的影响及其决策机制. 心理科学进展, 22(5), 845-856.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2014.00845
[24]	Li, S. Q., & Kong, Z. X. (2021). A Community with a shared future for mankind: The extension of wisdom in Chinese “harmony” culture. Pacific Journal, 29(8), 49-59.
	[李姝桥, 孔朝霞. (2021). 人类命运共同体:中国“和”文化的智慧延展. 太平洋学报, 29(8), 49-59.]
[25]	Li, Y., Li, H., Decety, J., & Lee, K. (2013). Experiencing a natural disaster alters children’s altruistic giving. Psychological Science, 24(9), 1686-1695.
[26]	Lim, D., & DeSteno, D. (2016). Suffering and compassion: The links among adverse life experiences, empathy, compassion, and prosocial behavior. Emotion, 16(2), 175-182. doi: 10.1037/emo0000144 pmid: 26751630
[27]	Menzies, R. E., & Menzies, R. G. (2020). Death anxiety in the time of COVID-19: Theoretical explanations and clinical implications. The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist, 13, e19.
[28]	Mortensen, C. R., Becker, D. V., Ackerman, J. M., Neuberg, S. L., & Kenrick, D. T. (2010). Infection breeds reticence: The effects of disease salience on self-perceptions of personality and behavioral avoidance tendencies. Psychological Science, 21(3), 440-447. doi: 10.1177/0956797610361706 pmid: 20424082
[29]	Nelson, L. D., & Norton, M. I. (2005). From student to superhero: Situational primes shape future helping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(4), 423-430.
[30]	Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & Solomon, S. (1999). A dual-process model of defense against conscious and unconscious death-related thoughts: An extension of terror management theory. Psychological Review, 106(4), 835-845. pmid: 10560330
[31]	Pyszczynski, T., Lockett, M., Greenberg, J., & Solomon, S. (2020). Terror management theory and the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 61(2), 173-189.
[32]	Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
[33]	Rosenblatt, A., Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Pyszczynski, T., & Lyon. (1989). Evidence for terror management theory: I. The effects of mortality salience on reactions to those who violate or uphold cultural values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(4), 681-690. pmid: 2795438
[34]	Sani, F., Herrera, M., & Bowe, M. (2009). Perceived collective continuity and ingroup identification as defence against death awareness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(1), 242-245.
[35]	Schaller, M., & Duncan, L. A. (2011). The behavioral immune system:Its evolution and social psychological implications. In J. P. Forgas, M. G. Haselton, & W. von Hippel (Eds.), Evolution and the social mind: Evolutionary psychology and social cognition(pp. 293-307). Psychology Press.
[36]	Schaller, M., & Park, J. H. (2011). The behavioral immune system (and why it matters). Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(2), 99-103.
[37]	Schindler, S., Reinhardt, N., & Reinhard, M. A. (2021). Defending one’s worldview under mortality salience: Testing the validity of an established idea. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 93, Article 104087.
[38]	Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (1991). A terror management theory of social behavior: The psychological functions of self-esteem and cultural worldviews. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 93-159.
[39]	Staub, E., & Vollhardt, J. (2008). Altruism born of suffering: The roots of caring and helping after victimization and other trauma. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 78(3), 267-280. doi: 10.1037/a0014223 pmid: 19123746
[40]	Wang, H. (2022). Understanding increased prosocial behavior under mortality salience in the perspective of terror management theory. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 670, 566-571.
[41]	Wang, K., Sun, Z., Hou, Y., & Yuan, M. (2023). Coping with mortality salience: The role of connection thinking and afterlife beliefs in Chinese context. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1190906.
[42]	Wang, M. C., Cai, B. G., Wu, Y., & Dai, X. Y. (2010). The factor structure of Chinese Rosenberg’ self-esteem scale affected by item statement method. Psychological Exploration, 30(3), 63-68.
	[王孟成, 蔡炳光, 吴艳, 戴晓阳. (2010). 项目表述方法对中文Rosenberg自尊量表因子结构的影响. 心理学探新, 30(3), 63-68.]
[43]	Wang, P., Wang, X. T., Gao, J., Li, X. L., & Xu, J. (2019). Adaptive time management: The effects of death awareness on time perception and intertemporal choice. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(12), 1314-1350.
	[王鹏, 王晓田, 高娟, 黎夏岚, 徐静. (2019). 适应性时间管理:死亡意识对时间知觉和跨期决策的影响. 心理学报, 51(12), 1341-1350.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.01341
[44]	Wang, X. J., Wang, N., Han, S. F., Liu, S., & Zhang, L. (2018). The influence of facial trustworthiness on helping behavior: The role of attachment type. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(11), 1292-1302. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.01292
	[王秀娟, 王娜, 韩尚锋, 刘燊, 张林. (2018). 面孔可信度对助人行为的影响:依恋安全的调节作用. 心理学报, 50(11), 1292-1302.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.01292
[45]	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. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063 pmid: 3397865
[46]	Wei, Q. W., Zhou, X. M., & Yu, G. L. (2015). The psychology of death: External defense or internal growth? Advances in Psychological Science, 23(2), 338-348. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2015.00338
	[韦庆旺, 周雪梅, 俞国良. (2015). 死亡心理:外部防御还是内在成长? 心理科学进展, 23(2), 338-348.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2015.00338
[47]	Xiao, Q., He, W., & Zhu, Y. (2017). Re-examining the relationship between mortality salience and prosocial behavior in Chinese context. Death Studies, 41(4), 251-255. doi: 10.1080/07481187.2016.1268220 pmid: 27918862
[48]	Yang, Y., Zhang, M. Y., & Ku, Y. (2015). The revalidation and development of the prosocial behavior scale for adolescent. Chinese Social Psychological Review, 2, 135-150.
	[杨莹, 张梦圆, 寇彧. (2015). 青少年亲社会行为量表的编制与维度的再验证. 中国社会心理学评论, 2(1), 135-150.]
[49]	Yuan, X. S., & Guo, S. P. (2017). Differential mode of association in Chinese interpersonal affection: Evidence from extrinsic affective simon task (EAST). Psychological Science, 40(3), 651-656.
	[袁晓劲, 郭斯萍. (2017). 中国人人际情感的差序格局关系:来自EAST的证据. 心理科学, 40(3), 651-656.]
[50]	Zaleskiewicz, T., Gasiorowska, A., & Kesebir, P. (2015). The Scrooge effect revisited: Mortality salience increases the satisfaction derived from prosocial behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 59, 67-76.
[51]	Zaleskiewicz, T., Gasiorowska, A., Kesebir, P., Luszczynska, A., & Pyszczynski, T. (2013). Money and the fear of death: The symbolic power of money as an existential anxiety buffer. Journal of Economic Psychology, 36, 55-67.