ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B
主办:中国心理学会
   中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

心理学报 ›› 2013, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (4): 453-465.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2013.00453

• 论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

公共资源困境中领导对群体成员合作行为的影响

章哲明;金盛华;吴嵩;周翔   

  1. (1北京师范大学心理学院, 北京 100875) (2北京师范大学应用实验心理北京市重点实验室, 北京 100875) (3中航技国际经贸发展有限公司, 北京 100101) (4中国人民人寿保险股份有限公司, 北京 100037)
  • 收稿日期:2012-05-28 发布日期:2013-04-25 出版日期:2013-04-25
  • 通讯作者: 金盛华
  • 基金资助:

    国家社会科学基金教育学重点项目(编号: ACA100004)、中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助。

The Influence of Leader on Group Member’s Cooperation in Common Resource Dilemmas

ZHANG Zheming;JIN Shenghua;WU Song;ZHOU Xiang   

  1. (1School of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China) (2Beijing Key Lab of Applied Experimental Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China) (3AVIC International Trade & Economic Development Ltd. Beijing 100101, China) (4 PICC Life Insurance Company Limited, Beijing 100037, China)
  • Received:2012-05-28 Online:2013-04-25 Published:2013-04-25
  • Contact: JIN Shenghua
  • Supported by:
     

摘要: 过去社会困境的领导研究大多都以被试作为领导, 发现贴上领导标签后, 被试倾向于拿取更多的公共资源, 从而有碍公共利益的实现。本研究指出, 如果领导的背叛行为能够使群体成员表现出自我节制行为的话, 那么设置领导则有可能促进公共利益的实现。研究通过三个实验, 考察领导与普通群体成员不同的行为方式以及领导的产生方式对群体成员行为的影响, 并检验公平理论和社会认同理论的解释力。研究结果表明, 领导表现出背叛行为时, 被试表现出更多的自我节制行为; 指派领导及外群体选举领导背叛时, 被试表现出更多的自我节制行为, 验证了社会认同理论的正确性。

关键词: 公共资源困境, 领导, 选举, 指派

Abstract: In past leadership research using common resource dilemmas, most researchers have studied the behavior of participants who identified as the leader. Individuals labeled “leaders” tended to harvest more common resources and impede the implementation of the public interest (De Cremer, 2003; De Cremer & Van Dijk, 2005; Van Dijk & De Cremer, 2006). Less is known, however, about the effects of establishing a leader on the behavior of the participants. If the betrayal of the leader could stimulate the self-restraint behavior of the group members, then the establishing a leader might promote the realization of the public interest. Three experiments were used to examine the impact of a leader’s behavior on the group member’s decision making. Experiments 1 manipulated the presence or absence of a leader and tested how the different behavior of a leader or common group member would influence the group member’s decision. Participants showed more self-restraint behavior when a leader showed the betrayal than when a common group member showed the betrayal. The participants also found the leader’s betrayal fairer, and regarded the leader as out-group member. Experiment 1 didn’t find the explanatory differences between Equity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Experiment 2 was conducted to evaluate the group member’s reaction to appointed and elected leaders. Participants showed more self-restraint behavior when an appointed leader showed the betrayal than when an elected leader did so. The participants also found the betrayal of the elected leader fairer, and regarded the appointed leader as out-group member. Experiment 2 confirmed the explanatory power of Social Identity Theory. Experiment 3 tested the impact of the betrayal of the in-group and out-group elected leader to the group member, in order to examine the Social Identity Theory. Participants showed more self-restraint behavior when out-group elected leader showed the betrayal. In contrast, when the in-group elected leader showed the betrayal, participants did not show self-restraint behavior. The results from all three experiments supported the hypotheses and suggested implications for organization management. Elected leaders should display justice and try to avoid the pursuit of personal interest. Leaders also should keep distance from their subordinates in some circumstances. Future research on leadership using the social dilemmas could evaluate the effects of personal variables.

Key words: common resource dilemmas, leader, elected, appointed

中图分类号: