面孔可信度对助人行为的影响：依恋安全的调节作用

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.01292

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

分别从特质依恋和状态依恋角度考察施助者的依恋安全在求助者面孔可信度与助人行为之间的调节作用。结果发现：(1)求助者面孔可信度影响助人行为, 面孔可信度高的求助者得到的助人行为显著多于面孔可信度低的求助者; (2)施助者的依恋安全调节求助者面孔可信度与助人行为之间的关系, 安全依恋能有效缓冲低面孔可信度带来助人行为下降的趋势。本研究结果表明依恋安全有助于提升社会安全感和促进亲社会行为, 因此应注重依恋安全的培养。

关键词: 助人行为, 助人意愿, 面孔可信度, 依恋安全

Abstract:

Researches on helping behaviors have always been a hot topic. Especially nowadays, helping others has become a risk-taking decision-making. Helping behavior is defined as an action that benefits others without return. In strange situations, the face, as the only clue to communicate or obtain information from, can affect people’s behaviors to a great extent. However, previous studies on helping behaviors did not take this issue into account, this study intended to combine situational factors and individual factors to comprehensively explore their impact on helping behaviors and to further investigate the moderating role of attachment security in the relationship between facial trustworthiness and helping behaviors.

This study included two experiments. Experiment 1 explored the effect of the characteristics of helpers’ trait attachment and facial trustworthiness by using a mixed experimental design of 2 (facial trustworthiness: high/low) × 3 (attachment type: security/anxiety/avoidance). Experiment 2 used a 2 (facial trustworthiness: high/low) × 2 (state-security attachment priming: yes/no) to investigate whether priming security attachment had safe influence as trait security attachment. During both experiments, subjects were presented randomly with faces of different facial trustworthiness. Participants selected their willingness to help others and donate money. The amount of money they donated represented their helping behaviors. These two indices were selected as dependent variables. A 7-point scale was used to measure help-willingness. The higher the score, the stronger of the willingness to help the seeker of participants. The amount of donation was between 0-100. The larger the number of donation, the more they were willing to contribute.

This study used SPSS 20.0 to analyze the data of the experiment, and the results verified the research hypotheses. The results of experiment 1 showed that there was a significant interaction between facial trustworthiness and the types of helpers’ attachment. The simple effect analysis showed that there were significant differences in the willingness and people’s behaviors with security attachments in both of the two facial trustworthiness, the willingness and money they input in high-facial trustworthiness were significantly higher than those in low-facial trustworthiness situation. There were also significant differences in the willingness and behaviors between low and high facial trustworthiness both anxious individuals and avoidance individuals. The willingness and behaviors to help in high-facial trustworthiness situation were significantly higher than those in low-facial trustworthiness situation. The results of experiment 2 on willingness and behaviors showed that there was a significant different in the interaction between facial trustworthiness and the types of helpers’ attachment. The simple effect analysis showed that there was a significant difference between the two facial trustworthiness situations for individuals of security attachment and a significant difference between the two facial trustworthiness situations for individuals of insecurity attachment, the willingness and helping behaviors in the high facial trustworthiness situation was higher significantly than low-facial trustworthiness situation. The different value in willingness and behavior in both experiment 1and experiment 2 under two facial trustworthiness situations for individuals of security attachment were significantly smaller than those for individuals of insecure attachment, indicating that attachment security to some extent had a regulatory role, it could buffer the risk-aided behavior to bring down.

This study has some significance. First of all, this study incorporated facial trustworthiness into helping behaviors, which provided a new way of researches of helping behaviors. Looking from the perspective of the face helped to distinguish the unfamiliar environment’s helping behaviors from the familiar environments. Second, the study found that individuals’ attachment types and the seeker’s face trustworthiness affects the helping behavior, indicating that the help-taking behaviors were the result of multiple factors, to remind the public to combine the help-seeking environment objectively and justly to see others’ behaviors. The media should also adopt a pragmatic attitude towards reports of people’s help behaviors so as to avoid reporting off the factual basis.

Key words: helping behaviors, helping willingness, facial trustworthiness, attachment security

中图分类号:

B849:C91

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.

WANG Xiujuan, WANG Na, HAN Shangfeng, LIU Shen, ZHANG Lin. (2018). The influence of facial trustworthiness on helping behavior: The role of attachment type. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(11), 1292-1302.

图/表 7

参考文献 51

[1]	Aquino K., Freeman D., Reed A., Felps W ., & Lim, V. K. G. (2009). Testing a social-cognitive model of moral behavior: The interactive influence of situations and moral identity centrality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97( 1), 123-141. doi: 10.1037/a0015406 URL
[2]	Boag, E. M., & Carnelley, K. B . (2016). Attachment and prejudice: The mediating role of empathy. British Journal of Social Psychology, 55( 2), 337-376. doi: 10.1111/bjso.2016.55.issue-2 URL
[3]	Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2. Separation: Anxiety and anger (Vol. II). New York: Basic Books.
[4]	Carnelley, K. B., & Rowe, A. C . (2010). Priming a sense of security: What goes through people’s minds? Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27( 2), 253-261. doi: 10.1177/0265407509360901 URL
[5]	Chen C. K., Waters H. S., Hartman M., Zimmerman S., Miklowitz D. J., & Waters E . (2013). The secure base script and the task of caring for elderly parents: Implications for attachment theory and clinical practice. Attachment and Human Development, 15( 3), 332-348.
[6]	Chen F. F., Jing Y. M., & Lee J. M . (2014). The looks of a leader: Competent and trustworthy, but not dominant. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 51, 27-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.10.008 URL
[7]	Collins, T. J., & Gillath, O. (2012). Attachment, breakup strategies, and associated outcomes: The effects of security enhancement on the selection of breakup strategies. Journal of Research in Personality, 46( 2), 210-222. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2012.01.008 URL
[8]	Dykas, M. J., & Cassidy, J. (2011). Attachment and the processing of social information across the life span: Theory and evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 137( 1), 19-46. doi: 10.1037/a0021367 URL pmid: 21219056
[9]	Ein-Dor T., Mikulincer M., & Shaver P. R . (2011). Attachment insecurities and the processing of threat-related information: Studying the schemas involved in insecure people’s coping strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101( 1), 78-93. doi: 10.1037/a0022503 URL
[10]	Emswiller T., Deaux K., & Willits J. E . (1971). Similarity, sex, and requests for small favors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1( 3), 284-291. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1971.tb00367.x URL
[11]	Ewing L., Caulfield F., Read A., & Rhodes G . (2015). Perceived trustworthiness of faces drives trust behaviour in children. Developmental Science, 18( 2), 327-357. doi: 10.1111/desc.12218 URL pmid: 25051999
[12]	Fischer P., Krueger J. I., Greitemeyer T., Vogrincic C., Kastenmüller A., Frey D., Heene M., … Kainbacher M . (2011). The bystander-effect: A meta-analytic review on bystander intervention in dangerous and non-dangerous emergencies. Psychological Bulletin, 137( 4), 517-537. doi: 10.1037/a0023304 URL
[13]	Funk, F., & Todorov, A. (2013). Criminal stereotypes in the courtroom: Facial tattoos affect guilt and punishment differently. Psychology Public Policy and Law, 19(4), 466-478. doi: 10.1037/a0034736 URL
[14]	Gaesser, B., & Schacter, D. L. (2014). Episodic simulation and episodic memory can increase intentions to help others. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111( 12), 4415-4420. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1402461111 URL
[15]	Hortensius R., Schutter D. J. L. G., & Gelder B. D . (2016). Personal distress and the influence of bystanders on responding to an emergency. Cognitive Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 16( 4), 672-688.
[16]	Jarvinen, M. J., & Paulus, T. B . (2017). Attachment and cognitive openness: Emotional underpinnings of intellectual humility. Journal of Positive Psychology, 12( 1), 74-86. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1167944 URL
[17]	Jessen, S., & Grossmann, T. (2017). Exploring the role of spatial frequency information during neural emotion processing in human infants. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11: 486.
[18]	Jiang, Y. Z. . ( 2013). The system info of situation interaction: Dialectical psychology and inter behavioral psychology. Journal of Psychological Science, 36( 2), 496-500.
	[ 姜永志 . ( 2013). 情境交互作用理论体系: 辩证心理学与交互行为心理学. 心理科学, 36( 2), 496-500.]
[19]	Kahneman, D., & Tversky. (1979). A prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47( 2), 262-292. doi: 10.1080/02109395.1987.10821483 URL
[20]	Kogut, T., & Kogut, E. (2013). Exploring the relationship between adult attachment style and the identifiable victim effect in helping behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49( 4), 651-660.
[21]	Kong. M., & Qian, X. J . ( 2015). Mr. right and surperman: Effect of implicit followership on employee’s behavior. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 47( 9), 1162-1171.
	[ 孔茗, 钱小军 . ( 2015). 被领导者“看好”的员工其行为也一定好吗?——内隐追随对员工行为的影响. 心理学报, 47( 9), 1162-1171.]
[22]	Li C. N., Shi X. X., Huang F., & Ma J . ( 2013). Concept, mechanism and function of attachment security. Journal of Beijing Normal University (Social Sciences), 63( 6), 30-37.
	[ 李彩娜, 石鑫欣, 黄凤, 马婧 . ( 2013). 安全依恋的概念、机制与功能. 北京师范大学学报(社会科学版), 63( 6), 30-37.]
[23]	Li C. N., Sun Y., Tuo R., & Liu J . ( 2016). The effects of attachment security on interpersonal trust: The moderating role of attachment anxiety. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 48( 8), 989-1001.
	[ 李彩娜, 孙颖, 拓瑞, 刘佳 . ( 2016). 安全依恋对人际信任的影响: 依恋焦虑的调节效应. 心理学报, 48( 8), 989-1001.]
[24]	Li, T, G., & K, Kazuo. ( 2006). Measuring adult attachment: Chinese adaption of the ECR scale. Acta Psychology Sinica, 38( 3), 300-406.
	[ 李同归, 加藤和生 . ( 2006). 成人依恋的测量:亲密关系经历量表(ecr)中文版. 心理学报, 38( 3), 399-406.]
[25]	Luke M. A., Sedikides C., & Carnelley K . (2012). Your love lifts me higher! The energizing quality of secure relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38( 6), 721-733. doi: 10.1177/0146167211436117 URL pmid: 22378830
[26]	Ma F. L., Evans A. D., Liu Y., Luo X. M., & Xu F . (2015). To lie or not to lie? The influence of parenting and theory-of-mind understanding on three-year-old children’s honesty. Journal of Moral Education, 44( 2), 198-212.
[27]	Ma F. L., Tang, Y L., Zheng, T T., & Xu F . ( 2014). The development of 3-to 5-year-olds’ trust judgment based on face. Psychological Development and Education, 30( 4), 337-344.
	[ 马凤玲, 汤玉龙, 郑婷婷, 徐芬 . ( 2014). 3~5岁幼儿基于面孔的信任判断的发展. 心理发展与教育, 30( 4), 337-344.]
[28]	Mi L., Tao S., Wang W. J., Dong Q., Jin S. H., & Liu C . (2013). English vowel identification in long-term speech-shaped noise and multi-talker babble for English and Chinese listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 133( 5), EL391-EL397.
[29]	Michniewicz, K. S., & Vandello, J. A . (2014). The attractive underdog: When disadvantage bolsters attractiveness. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30( 7), 942-952.
[30]	Mikulincer, M. (1998). Attachment working models and the sense of trust: an exploration of interaction goals and affect regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74( 74), 1209-1224. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1209 URL
[31]	Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2003). The attachment behavioral system in adulthood: Activation, psychodynamics, and interpersonal processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 53-152. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(03)01002-5 URL
[32]	Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Reflections on security dynamics: Core constructs, psychological mechanisms, relational contexts, and the need for an integrative theory. Psychological Inquiry, 18( 3), 197-209. doi: 10.1080/10478400701512893 URL
[33]	Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2015). The psychological effects of the contextual activation of security-enhancing mental representations in adulthood. Current Opinion in Psychology, 1, 18-21. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.01.008 URL
[34]	Mikulincer M., Shaver P. R., Gillath O., & Nitzberg R. A . (2005). Attachment, caregiving, and altruism: Boosting attachment security increases compassion and helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89( 5), 817-839. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.5.817 URL
[35]	Oldfield J., Humphrey N., & Hebron J . (2016). The role of parental and peer attachment relationships and school connectedness in predicting adolescent mental health outcomes. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 21( 1), 21-29. doi: 10.1111/camh.2016.21.issue-1 URL
[36]	Oosterhof, N. N., & Todorov, A. (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105( 32), 11087-11092. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0805664105 URL
[37]	Overall N. C., Fletcher G. J., Simpson J. A., & Fillo J . (2015). Attachment insecurity, biased perceptions of romantic partners’ negative emotions, and hostile relationship behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108( 5), 730-749. doi: 10.1037/a0038987 URL
[38]	Pan Y. G., Zhang D. J., Liu Y. L., Ran G. M., & Teng Z. J . (2016). The effects of attachment style and security priming on the perception of others’ pain. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 34( 2), 184-208.
[39]	Park, S., & Shin, J. (2017). The influence of anonymous peers on prosocial behavior. Plos One, 12( 10), e0185521.
[40]	Ritchie K. L., Palermo R., & Rhodes G . (2017). Forming impressions of facial attractiveness is mandatory. Scientific Reports, 7( 1), 469-477. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-00526-9 URL
[41]	Shentu T., Ma J., & Guo Y . (2018). Social attachment shapes emergency responses: Evidence from a postfire study. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 46( 1), 139-150. doi: 10.2224/sbp.6946 URL
[42]	Thomas R., Hochschild Jr., & Casey B . (2011). About face: The association between facial appearance and status attainment among military personnel. Sociological Spectrum, 31( 3), 369-395. doi: 10.1080/02732173.2011.557132 URL
[43]	Todorov A., Olivola C. Y., Dotsch R., & Mende-Siedlecki P . (2015). Social attributions from faces: Determinants, consequences, accuracy, and functional significance. Annual Review of Psychology, 66( 1), 519-545. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143831 URL
[44]	Wang Y. H., Li D. P., Sun W. Q., Zhao L. Y., Lai X. F., & Zhou Y. Y . ( 2017). Parent-child attachment and prosocial behavior among junior high school students: Moderated mediation effect. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49( 5), 663-679.
	[ 王艳辉, 李董平, 孙文强, 赵力燕, 赖雪芬, 周月月 . ( 2017). 亲子依恋与初中生亲社会行为: 有调节的中介效应. 心理学报, 49( 5), 663-679.]
[45]	Wilson, J. P., & Rule, N. O . (2015). Facial trustworthiness predicts extreme criminal-sentencing outcomes. Psychological Science, 26( 8), 1325-1331. doi: 10.1177/0956797615590992 URL
[46]	Xia, M., & Wang, Y. W . ( 2015). The effect of empathy and situation safety on helping behavior-The moderating role of interpersonal trust. Journal of Central China Normal University (Humanities and Social Sciences), 54( 4), 168-176.
	[ 夏勉, 王远伟 . ( 2015). 状态共情、情境安全程度对助人行为的影响——人际信任的调节作用. 华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版), 54( 4), 168-176.]
[47]	Xing C., Liu, T T., & Zhang X . ( 2015). Prosocial behaviors in emergencies: Mating motive change men and women’s herico helping tendencies differently. Journal of Psychological Science, 38( 1), 172-178.
	[ 邢采, 刘婷婷, 张希 . ( 2015). 危机情境下的亲社会行为: 求偶动机对危机救助意愿的影响. 心理科学 38( 1), 172-178.]
[48]	Zhang, F., & Labouvie-vief, G. (2004). Stability and fluctuation in adult attachment style over a 6-year period. Attachment and Human Development, 6( 4), 419-438. doi: 10.1080/1461673042000303127 URL
[49]	Zhang L., Li Y., Liu S., Tan Q., Xu Q., & Yang Y. P . ( 2016). The impression processing of unfamiliar faces: Based on the facial characteristics. Journal of Psychological Science, 39( 6), 1373-1378.
	[ 张林, 李玥, 刘燊, 谭群, 徐强, 杨亚平 . ( 2016). 陌生面孔的印象加工: 基于面孔特征的视角. 心理科学, 39( 6), 1373-1378.]
[50]	Zhang Y., Kong F. C., Zhong Y. L., & Kou H . (2014). Personality manipulations: Do they modulate facial attractiveness ratings? Personality and Individual Differences, 70( 11), 80-84. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2014.06.033 URL
[51]	Zhong, Y P., Yang, Z L., & Fan W . ( 2015). The effect of self-other overlap on helping behavior: Moderating of perspective taking. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 47( 8), 1050-1057.
	[ 钟毅平, 杨子鹿, 范伟 . ( 2015). 自我-他人重叠对助人行为的影响: 观点采择的调节作用. 心理学报, 47( 8), 1050-1057.]

助人行为	依恋类型	高面孔可信度	低面孔可信度
助人意愿	安全	5.38 ± 0.54	4.41 ± 0.39
	焦虑	4.50 ± 0.38	2.30 ± 0.33
	回避	3.96 ± 0.49	2.44 ± 0.30
捐助金额	安全	68.37 ± 5.99	61.67 ± 3.57
	焦虑	53.44 ± 3.37	37.81 ± 4.09
	回避	41.32 ± 5.26	27.95 ± 4.85

助人行为	依恋类型	高面孔可信度	低面孔可信度
助人意愿	安全	5.38 ± 0.54	4.41 ± 0.39
	焦虑	4.50 ± 0.38	2.30 ± 0.33
	回避	3.96 ± 0.49	2.44 ± 0.30
捐助金额	安全	68.37 ± 5.99	61.67 ± 3.57
	焦虑	53.44 ± 3.37	37.81 ± 4.09
	回避	41.32 ± 5.26	27.95 ± 4.85

助人行为	启动条件	高面孔可信度	低面孔可信度
助人意愿	启动组	4.54 ± 0.58	4.52 ± 0.37
助人意愿	控制组	3.69 ± 0.42	3.34 ± 0.49
捐助金额	启动组	63.40 ± 6.99	60.23 ± 6.50
捐助金额	控制组	50.16 ± 7.08	40.71 ± 6.10

助人行为	启动条件	高面孔可信度	低面孔可信度
助人意愿	启动组	4.54 ± 0.58	4.52 ± 0.37
助人意愿	控制组	3.69 ± 0.42	3.34 ± 0.49
捐助金额	启动组	63.40 ± 6.99	60.23 ± 6.50
捐助金额	控制组	50.16 ± 7.08	40.71 ± 6.10