利益冲突背景下和谐性人格对合作的影响

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2026.2405

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 和谐性作为一种典型的追求人际和睦的本土人格特质, 是理解利益冲突下合作行为差异的重要因素。本文通过行为实验与功能性近红外光谱(functional near-infrared spectroscopy, fNIRS)超扫描技术, 探究和谐性对合作的影响及其脑间神经基础。研究1采用囚徒困境问卷, 发现和谐性能稳定地正向预测合作选择, 且该预测作用不受合作激励水平的调节。研究2进一步采用双人囚徒困境任务, 将被试分为高/低和谐性配对组进行实时互动。结果显示, 高和谐性组的合作率更高, 更倾向于“投桃报李”而非“以牙还牙”, 且在合作中体验到对合作方更高的满意度与更低的内疚感。超扫描结果表明, 和谐性调节了合作中的脑间同步性(Inter-brain Synchronization, IBS)。高和谐性配对组在互惠合作时, 其左额下回(inferior frontal gyrus, IFG)与右内侧颞叶(medial temporal lobe, MTL)的IBS显著增强, 且左额极(frontopolar area, FPC) 和左背外侧前额叶(dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, dlPFC)的同步水平与合作率显著正相关。研究表明高和谐性个体通过积极的互惠模式促进合作, 并发现前额叶-颞叶的IBS与该行为模式的潜在关联。这体现了和谐性人际取向人格特质对中国人合作行为的重要影响。

关键词: 和谐性, 合作, 囚徒困境, 前额叶, 脑间同步性

Abstract: Cooperation is crucial for navigating conflicts of benefits, yet individuals vary greatly in their cooperative tendencies. Personality traits offer a key lens for understanding these differences; however, research on personality traits has predominantly focused on Western-based “Big Five” constructs and often overlooked culturally-specific, relationship-oriented traits. Harmony, a culturally relevant personality trait rooted in Eastern cultures that reflects a propensity to maintain interpersonal peace and avoid direct conflict, is a prime candidate for predicting cooperative behavior. This study systematically investigated whether and how harmony influences cooperation in conflict-of-interest scenarios. The study addressed two questions. First, does harmony consistently predict cooperative choices, and is the effect of harmony moderated by situational incentives? Second, what is the underlying interbrain synchronization (IBS) of this effect from a dyadic interaction perspective?
Two studies were conducted to address these questions. Study 1 was a questionnaire-based experiment involving 213 university participants (M_age = 21.69 years, 37.85% male). The participants completed the Harmony subscale of the Cross-Cultural (Chinese) Personality Assessment Inventory 2 and a hypothetical Prisoner’s Dilemma Game (PDG) task under two conditions (low vs. high cooperation incentive). Study 2 employed a two-person iterated PDG task combined with functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) hyperscanning. The participants were prescreened on the basis of their harmony score and assigned to either high-harmony dyads (33 pairs) or low-harmony dyads (30 pairs). All participants in Study 2 were female to control for gender effects in social interaction. The task involved 120 rounds of real-time interaction, enabling the measurement of behavioral patterns and IBS.
The results of Study 1 showed that harmony positively predicted cooperative choices under both low-incentive (R² = 0.03, p = 0.014) and high-incentive (R² = 0.01, p = 0.001) conditions. The interaction between harmony and cooperation incentive was nonsignificant (F(1, 211) = 0.02, p = 0.89), which indicated that the predictive power of harmony was stable across different situational incentives. In Study 2, the behavioral results revealed a significantly higher rate of mutual cooperation in the high-harmony dyads than in the low-harmony dyads (M_high = 0.72 vs. M_low = 0.47, t (124) = 3.55, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the high-harmony individuals were more likely to adopt a “tit-for-tat” reciprocal strategy and less likely to engage in retaliation following a partner’s defection (interaction effect: F(3, 369) = 3.67, p = 0.009). The fNIRS hyperscanning results revealed a crucial moderating role of harmony: IBS was significantly increased during mutual cooperation but only within the high-harmony dyads. This enhanced synchronization occurred specifically in the left inferior frontal gyrus and the right medial temporal lobe. Critically, the level of IBS in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (L-dlPFC) and left frontopolar area (L-FPC) during mutual cooperation was positively correlated with the dyad’s overall mutual cooperation rate, and this relationship was only significant for the high-harmony dyads (e.g., L-dlPFC: r = 0.71, p = 0.001, FDR corrected).
This study provides preliminarily evidence that the relationship-oriented personality trait (harmony) modulates IBS during cooperation, linking culturally relevant personality to the neural basis of social interaction. These findings may identify neural markers for cooperation, offering insights for enhancing team effectiveness and conflict resolution.

Key words: Harmony, cooperation, prisoner's dilemma, prefrontal cortex, interbrain synchronization (IBS)

中图分类号:

B849:C91

舒靖懿, 包雅馨, 莫展, 范为桥, 张明明. (2026). 利益冲突背景下和谐性人格对合作的影响. 心理学报, 58(11), 2405-2420.

SHU Jingyi, BAO Yaxin, MO Zhan, FAN Weiqiao, ZHANG Mingming. (2026). Effects of harmony on cooperation in the context of conflicts of benefits. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 58(11), 2405-2420.

参考文献

[1] Babiloni, F., & Astolfi, L. (2014). Social neuroscience and hyperscanning techniques: Past, present and future.Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 44, 76-93.
[2] Baker J. M., Liu N., Cui X., Vrticka P., Saggar M., Hosseini S. M. H., & Reiss A. L. (2016). Sex differences in neural and behavioral signatures of cooperation revealed by fNIRS hyperscanning.Scientific Reports, 6(1), 26492.
[3] Balliet D., Mulder L. B., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2011). Reward, punishment, and cooperation: A meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 594-615.
[4] Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
[5] Chen J., Chen L. N., & Zhang J. X. (2007). The relationship between personality of interpersonal relations and styles of handling superior-subordinate conflict at work. Chinese Journal of Ergonomics, 13(2), 10-12, 6.
[陈晶, 陈丽娜, 张建新. (2007). 人际关系性人格因素与上下级工作冲突处理方式的关系. 人类工效学, 13(2), 10-12, 6]
[6] Chen Y. H., Bai L., & Li L. F. (2015). The characteristics and development of moral emotion and its influence on moral behavior. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 13(5), 627-636.
[陈英和, 白柳, 李龙凤. (2015). 道德情绪的特点、发展及其对行为的影响.心理与行为研究, 13(5), 627-636.]
[7] Cheung F. M., Cheung S. F., Zhang J., Leung K., Leong F., & Yeh K. H. (2008). Relevance of openness as a personality dimension in Chinese culture: Aspects of its cultural relevance.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39(1), 81-108.
[8] Cheung F. M., Fan W., Cheung S. F., & Leung K. (2008). Standardization of the cross-cultural [Chinese] Personality Assessment Inventory for Adolescents in Hong Kong: A combined emic-etic approach to personality assessment.Acta Psychologica Sinica, 40(7), 839-852.
[张妙清, 范为桥, 张树辉, 梁觉. (2008). 跨文化(中国人)个性测量表青少年版(CPAI-A)的香港标准化研究——兼顾文化共通性与特殊性的人格测量.心理学报, 40(7), 839-852.]
[9] Cheung F. M., Leung K., Zhang J. X., Sun H. F., Gan Y. Q., Song W. Z., & Xie D. (2001). Indigenous Chinese personality constructs: Is the five-factor model complete? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(4), 407-433.
[10] Clark C. B., Thorne C. B., Vann J., & Cropsey K. L. (2014). Five-factor personality and cooperative behavior.North American Journal of Psychology, 16(3), 481-493.
[11] Cui X., Bryant D. M., & Reiss A. L. (2012). NIRS-based hyperscanning reveals increased interpersonal coherence in superior frontal cortex during cooperation.NeuroImage, 59(3), 2430-2437.
[12] Czeszumski A., Liang S. H.-Y., Dikker S., König P., Lee C.-P., Koole S. L., & Kelsen B. (2022). Cooperative behavior evokes interbrain synchrony in the prefrontal and temporoparietal cortex: A systematic review and meta-analysis of fNIRS hyperscanning studies. eNeuro, 9(2), ENEURO.0268-21.2022.
[13] DeYoung C. G., Quilty L. C., & Peterson J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 880-896.
[14] Fan W., Cheung F. M., Zhang J. X., & Cheung S. F. (2011). A combined emic-etic approach to personality: CPAI and cross-cultural applications.Acta Psychologica Sinica, 43(12), 1418-1429.
[范为桥, 张妙清, 张建新, 张树辉. (2011). 兼顾文化共通性与特殊性的人格研究: CPAI及其跨文化应用.心理学报, 43(12), 1418-1429.]
[15] Fan W., Li M., Leong F., & Zhou M. (2021). West meets east in a new two-polarities model of personality: Combining self-relatedness structure with independent-interdependent functions.Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 739900.
[16] Fermin A. S. R., Sakagami M., Kiyonari T., Li Y., Matsumoto Y., & Yamagishi T. (2016). Representation of economic preferences in the structure and function of the amygdala and prefrontal cortex.Scientific Reports, 6(1), 20982.
[17] Friedman, N. P., & Robbins, T. W. (2022). The role of prefrontal cortex in cognitive control and executive function.Neuropsychopharmacology, 47(1), 72-89.
[18] Herlin B., Navarro V., & Dupont S. (2021). The temporal pole: From anatomy to function—A literature appraisal.Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy, 113, 101925.
[19] Holt R. J., Chura L. R., Lai M.-C., Suckling J., Von Dem Hagen E., Calder A. J., … Spencer M. D. (2014). ‘Reading the mind in the eyes’: An fMRI study of adolescents with autism and their siblings.Psychological Medicine, 44(15), 3215-3227.
[20] Hu Y., Hu Y., Li X., Pan Y., & Cheng X. (2017). Brain-to-brain synchronization across two persons predicts mutual prosociality.Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 12(12), 1835-1844.
[21] Iacoboni M., Lieberman M. D., Knowlton B. J., Molnar-Szakacs I., Moritz C., Throop C. J., & Fiske A. P. (2004). Watching social interactions produces dorsomedial prefrontal and medial parietal BOLD fMRI signal increases compared to a resting baseline.NeuroImage, 21(3), 1167-1173.
[22] Jin S., Columbus S., Van Lange, P. A. M., & Balliet D. (2024). Conflict, cooperation, and institutional choice.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 111, 104566.
[23] Jin S., Spadaro G., & Balliet D. (2025). Institutions and cooperation: A meta-analysis of structural features in social dilemmas.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 129(2), 286-312.
[24] Leung K., Koch P. T., & Lu L. (2002). A dualistic model of harmony and its implications for conflict management in Asia.Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19, 201-220.
[25] Levine E. E., Barasch A., Rand D., Berman J. Z., & Small D. A. (2018). Signaling emotion and reason in cooperation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(5), 702-719.
[26] Li M., Fan W., & Chen X. (2018). A cross-lagged study of peer victimization and children’s interpersonal relatedness personality traits: A comparison between urban and rural children. Psychological Development and Education, 34(6), 682-691.
[李梦婷, 范为桥, 陈欣银. (2018). 同伴侵害与人际关系取向人格特质的交叉滞后分析:城市原住儿童与农村随迁儿童的比较.心理发展与教育, 34(6), 682-691.]
[27] Li R., Balliet D., Thielmann I., & de Vries, R. E. (2025). Revisiting situational strength: Do strong situations restrict variance in behaviors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 129(3), 551-575.
[28] Li Y., Chen R., Turel O., Feng T., Zhu C.-Z., & He Q. (2021). Dyad sex composition effect on inter-brain synchronization in face-to-face cooperation.Brain Imaging and Behavior, 15(3), 1667-1675.
[29] Lim M., Carollo A., Bizzego A., Chen A. S., & Esposito G. (2024). Culture, sex and social context influence brain-to-brain synchrony: An fNIRS hyperscanning study.BMC Psychology, 12(1), 350.
[30] Liu Q., Cui H., Huang B., Huang Y., Sun H., Ru X., Zhang M., & Chen W. (2023). Inter-brain neural mechanism and influencing factors underlying different cooperative behaviors: A hyperscanning study.Brain Structure and Function, 229(1), 75-95.
[31] Locey M. L., Jones B. A., & Rachlin H. (2011). Real and hypothetical rewards.Judgment and Decision Making, 6(6), 552-564.
[32] Lozano, J. H. (2016). Personality and behavior in social dilemmas: Testing the situational strength hypothesis and the role of hypothetical versus real incentives.Journal of Personality, 84(1), 71-78.
[33] Luyten, P., & Blatt, S. J. (2013). Interpersonal relatedness and self-definition in normal and disrupted personality development: Retrospect and prospect.American Psychologist, 68(3), 172-183.
[34] Martin S., Ferrante M., Bruera A., & Hartwigsen G. (2025). Causal contributions of left inferior and medial frontal cortex to semantic and executive control.Communications Biology, 8(1), 1343.
[35] Meyer R. D., Dalal R. S., & Hermida R. (2010). A review and synthesis of situational strength in the organizational sciences.Journal of Management, 36(1), 121-140.
[36] Micheli L., Stallen M., & Sanfey A. G. (2021). The effect of centralized financial and social incentives on cooperative behavior and its underlying neural mechanisms.Brain Sciences, 11(3), 317.
[37] Molavi, B., & Dumont, G. A. (2012). Wavelet-based motion artifact removal for functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Physiological Measurement, 33(2), 259-270.
[38] Müller V., Ohström K. R. P., & Lindenberger U. (2021). Interactive brains, social minds: Neural and physiological mechanisms of interpersonal action coordination.Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 128, 661-677.
[39] Olson I. R., Plotzker A., & Ezzyat Y. (2007). The Enigmatic temporal pole: A review of findings on social and emotional processing.Brain, 130(7), 1718-1731.
[40] Pan Y., Novembre G., Song B., Li X., & Hu Y. (2018). Interpersonal synchronization of inferior frontal cortices tracks social interactive learning of a song.NeuroImage, 183, 280-290.
[41] Piazza E. A., Hasenfratz L., Hasson U., & Lew-Williams C. (2020). Infant and adult brains are coupled to the dynamics of natural communication.Psychological Science, 31(1), 6-17.
[42] Qi Y., Liu Z., Cao S., Han Y., Wang Q., Liu X., & Wu H. (2023). Social value orientation modulates behavioral and neural responses to social influence.Human Brain Mapping, 44(8), 3222-3231.
[43] Reniers R. L. E. P., Völlm B. A., Elliott R., & Corcoran R. (2014). Empathy, ToM, and self-other differentiation: An fMRI study of internal states.Social Neuroscience, 9(1), 50-62.
[44] Russo-Netzer, P., & Atad, O. I. (2024). Activating values intervention: An integrative pathway to well-being.Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1375237.
[45] Schmidt S. N. L., Hass J., Kirsch P., & Mier D. (2021). The human mirror neuron system—A common neural basis for social cognition? Psychophysiology, 58(5), e13781.
[46] Schroeder K. B., Nettle D., & McElreath R. (2015). Interactions between personality and institutions in cooperative behaviour in humans.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 370(1683), 20150011.
[47] Singh, A., & Waldia, N. (2024). “If you want peace avoid interpersonal conflict”: A moderating role of organizational climate.Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 11(4), 892-912.
[48] Thalmayer A. G., Mather K., Saucier G., Naudé L., Florence M., Adonis T.-A., … Condon D. M. (2024). The cross-cultural big two: A culturally de-centered theoretical and measurement model for personality traits.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 128(5), 1181-1208
[49] Tong Y., Lindsey K. P., & deB Frederick B. (2011). Partitioning of physiological noise signals in the brain with concurrent near-infrared spectroscopy and fMRI. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism, 31(12), 2352-2362.
[50] Van Lange, P. A. M., & Balliet, D. (2015). Interdependence theory. In M. Mikulincer, P. R. Shaver, J. A. Simpson, & J. F. Dovidio (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology, Vol. 3: Interpersonal relations.(pp. 65-92). American Psychological Association.
[51] Wang H., Cong Y., Liu C., & Li L. (2025). An fNIRS hyperscanning study on the influence of team type and sex on athletes’ interpersonal trust and neural mechanisms.Scientific Reports, 15(1), 28456.
[52] Wang M., Dai X., & Yao S. (2011). Development of the Chinese Big Five Personality Inventory (CBF-PI) III: Psychometric properties of CBF-PI brief version.Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 19(4), 454-457.
[王孟成, 戴晓阳, 姚树桥. (2011). 中国大五人格问卷的初步编制Ⅲ: 简式版的制定及信效度检验.中国临床心理学杂志, 19(4), 454-457.]
[53] Zajkowski W., Badman R. P., Haruno M., & Akaishi R. (2024). A neurocognitive mechanism for increased cooperation during group formation.Communications Psychology, 2(1), 127.
[54] Zhang M., Jia H., & Zheng M. (2020). Interbrain synchrony in the expectation of cooperation behavior: A hyperscanning study using functional near-infrared spectroscopy.Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 542093.
[55] Zhang M., Yin Z., Zhang X., Zhang H., Bao M., & Xuan B. (2024). Neural mechanisms distinguishing two types of cooperative problem-solving approaches: An fNIRS hyperscanning study.NeuroImage, 291, 120587.
[56] Zhao H., Zhang C., Tao R., Duan H., & Xu S. (2023). Distinct inter-brain synchronization patterns underlying group decision-making under uncertainty with partners in different interpersonal relationships.NeuroImage, 272, 120043.
[57] Zhou M. J., Li F. G., Mu W. Q., Fan W., Zhang J. X., & Cheung M. Q. (2023). Round outside and square inside: The latent profile structure and adaptability of Chinese interpersonal relatedness.Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55(3), 390-405.
[周明洁, 李府桂, 穆蔚琦, 范为桥, 张建新, 张妙清. (2023). 外圆内方:中国人人际关系性的潜在剖面结构及其适应性.心理学报, 55(3), 390-405.]
[58] Zimeo Morais G. A., Balardin J. B., & Sato J. R. (2018). fNIRS Optodes’ Location Decider (fOLD): A toolbox for probe arrangement guided by brain regions-of-interest.Scientific Reports, 8(1), 3341.