第三方惩罚中的规范错觉：基于公正世界信念的解释

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.00281

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

惩罚规范在一定程度上会影响个体的惩罚行为, 但个体对惩罚规范的感知与实际规范之间可能存在差异, 这被称为规范错觉。为了更好地从这一角度理解第三方惩罚, 我们需要回答的是：第三方惩罚中是否存在规范错觉?如果存在, 其方向如何?会对个体自身的惩罚行为产生何种影响?实验1 (N = 449)和实验2 (N = 134)的结果表明, 在违规情境中, 人们往往低估了他人的惩罚水平, 这导致自身较低的惩罚行为。实验3 (N = 164)和实验4 (N = 284)进一步发现, 较弱的公正世界信念导致人们对他人惩罚水平的低估, 从而影响了自身的惩罚行为, 而社会距离调节了公正世界信念对规范错觉的影响。上述结果表明, 规范错觉会受到内部(公正世界信念)和外部(社会距离)两个参照点的影响, 同时也在一定程度上说明第三方惩罚是一种注重维护规范的积极行为、而非注重个人收益的策略行为。

关键词: 第三方惩罚, 规范错觉, 公正世界信念, 社会距离

Abstract:

Punishment decisions might be guided by the norm of punishment, that is, people will implement their own punishment according to perceived prevalence of punishment in a similar social midst. However, there may be differences between an individual’s perception of norms and actual norms, which is called normative misperception. This article uses four experiments to explore the existence, the direction, and the cause of the normative misperception in third-party punishment, as well as its influence on people’s own punitive behaviors.
In Experiment 1, 449 participants were randomized in a four group factorial design (punishing before estimating, estimating before punishing, punishing only, and estimating only). Experiment 1 consisted of 6 rounds of dictator game, in which participants made punishment decisions for 6 offers and/or estimated the average punishment level of other participants in each offer. Experiment 2 aimed to establish the causal relationship between the normative misperception and the punishment by directly manipulating the normative misperception. Specifically, 134 participants were randomly divided into the overestimation group and underestimation group. After receiving the feedback, participants made punishment decision for an unfair offer and estimated the level of punishment of others in this offer. The purpose of Experiment 3 was to test the model of belief in a just world (BJW)-normative misperception-punishment, as well as the moderating effect of perceived social distance (PSD), with a within-participants design involving 164 participants. The procedure was similar to that of Experiment 1, except that we measured participants’ BJW and PSD before and after the game, respectively. In Experiment 4, we manipulated participants’ BJW through reading materials to test the causal relationship between BJW and the normative misperception.
The results of Experiment 1 showed that there is an underestimated normative misperception in third-party punishment, which leads to a lower level of punishment. Experiment 2 proved that there exists a causal relationship between the normative misperception and punishment by directly manipulating the independent variables. Experiment 3 demonstrated that BJW might be an underlying cause of the normative misperception, while PSD moderates the effect of BJW on the normative misperception. Finally, Experiment 4 showed the causal relationship between BJW and the normative misperception, providing additional evidence to the results of Experiment 3.
To sum up, we have found evidence of normative misperception in third-party punishment through 4 experiments. This underestimated misperception might be affected by dual reference points: BJW (internal) and PSD (external). It also shows to a certain extent that third-party punishment is a norm-maintaining behavior rather than a gain-based strategic behavior.

Key words: third-party punishment, normative misperception, belief in a just world, perceived social distance

中图分类号:

B849: C91

杨莎莎, 陈思静. (2022). 第三方惩罚中的规范错觉：基于公正世界信念的解释. 心理学报, 54(3), 281-299.

YANG Shasha, CHEN Sijing. (2022). Normative misperception in third-party punishment: An explanation from the perspective of belief in a just world. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 54(3), 281-299.

图/表 16

参考文献 95

[1]	Amialchuk, A., Ajilore, O., & Egan, K. (2019). The influence of misperceptions about social norms on substance use among school-aged adolescents. Health Economics, 28(6), 736-747. doi: 10.1002/hec.v28.6 URL
[2]	Anthenien, A. M., DeLozier, S. J., Neighbors, C., & Rhodes, M. G. (2018). College student normative misperceptions of peer study habit use. Social Psychology of Education, 21(2), 303-322. doi: 10.1007/s11218-017-9412-z URL
[3]	Bai, B. Y., Liu, X. X., & Kou, Y. (2014). Belief in a just world lowers perceived intention of corruption: The mediating role of perceived punishment. PloS One, 9(5), e97075. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097075 URL
[4]	Balafoutas, L., Nikiforakis, N., & Rockenbach, B. (2016). Altruistic punishment does not increase with the severity of norm violations in the field. Nature Communications, 7, 13327. doi: 10.1038/ncomms13327 pmid: 27802261
[5]	Bègue, L., & Bastounis, M. (2003). Two spheres of belief in justice: Extensive support for the bidimensional model of belief in a just world. Journal of Personality, 71(3), 435-463. doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.7103007 URL
[6]	Bicchieri, C., Dimant, E., & Gächter, S. (2020). Observability, social proximity, and the erosion of norm compliance. (CESifo Working Paper No. 8212). Munich, Germany: Center for Economic Studies and ifo Institute.
[7]	Bouman, T., & Steg, L. (2019). Motivating society-wide pro- environmental change. One Earth, 1(1), 27-30. doi: 10.1016/j.oneear.2019.08.002 URL
[8]	Bouman, T., Steg, L., & Zawadzki, S. J. (2020). The value of what others value: When perceived biospheric group values influence individuals’ pro-environmental engagement. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 71, 101470. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101470 URL
[9]	Bursztyn, L., González, A. L., & Yanagizawa-Drott, D. (2020). Misperceived social norms: Women working outside the home in Saudi Arabia. The American Economic Review, 110(10), 2997-3029. doi: 10.1257/aer.20180975 URL
[10]	Burton-Chellew, M. N., El Mouden, C., & West, S. A. (2017). Social learning and the demise of costly cooperation in humans. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 284(1853), 20170067.
[11]	Charness, G., & Gneezy, U. (2008). What's in a name? Anonymity and social distance in dictator and ultimatum games. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 68(1), 29-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2008.03.001 URL
[12]	Chen, H., Zeng, Z., & Ma, J. (2020). The source of punishment matters: Third-party punishment restrains observers from selfish behaviors better than does second-party punishment by shaping norm perceptions. PloS One, 15(3), e0229510. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229510 URL
[13]	Chen, S., Liu, J., & Hu, H. (2021). A norm-based conditional process model of the negative impact of optimistic bias on self-protection behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic in three Chinese cities. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 659218. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.659218 URL
[14]	Chen, S. J., Hu, H. M., & Yang, S. S. (2020). Payment vs. Retaliation: Impact of Cost Form on Third-Party Punishment. Journal of Psychological Science, 43(2), 416-422.
	[陈思静, 胡华敏, 杨莎莎. (2020). 支付与报复: 成本形式对第三方惩罚的影响. 心理科学, 43(2), 416-422.]
[15]	Chen, S. J., Pu, X. L., Zhu, Y., Wang, H., & Liu, J. W. (2021). The impact of normative misperception on food waste in dining out: Mechanism analyses and countermeasures. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(8), 904-918. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00904 URL
	[陈思静, 濮雪丽, 朱玥, 汪昊, 刘建伟. (2021). 规范错觉对外出就餐中食物浪费的影响:心理机制与应对策略. 心理学报, 53(8), 904-918.]
[16]	Chen, S. J., Xing, Y. L., Weng, Y. J., & Li, C. (2021). Spillover effects of third-party punishment on cooperation: A norm- based explanation. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(7), 758-772. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00758 URL
	[陈思静, 邢懿琳, 翁异静, 黎常. (2021). 第三方惩罚对合作的溢出效应: 基于社会规范的解释. 心理学报, 53(7), 758-772.]
[17]	Chen, S. J., & Xu Y. C. (2020). Warmth and competence: Impact of third-party punishment on punishers’ reputation. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 52(12), 1436-1451. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.01436 URL
	[陈思静, 徐烨超. (2020). “仁者”还是“智者”: 第三方惩罚对惩罚者声誉的影响. 心理学报, 52(12), 1436-1451.]
[18]	Correia, I., Vala, J., & Aguiar, P. (2007). Victim’s innocence, social categorization, and the threat to the belief in a just world. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(1), 31-38. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.010 URL
[19]	Cox, M. J., DiBello, A. M., Meisel, M. K., Ott, M. Q., Kenney, S. R., Clark, M. A., & Barnett, N. P. (2019). Do misperceptions of peer drinking influence personal drinking behavior? Results from a complete social network of first-year college students. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 33(3), 297-303. doi: 10.1037/adb0000455 URL
[20]	Csukly, G., Polgár, P., Tombor, L., Réthelyi, J., & Kéri, S. (2011). Are patients with schizophrenia rational maximizers? Evidence from an ultimatum game study. Psychiatry Research, 187(1-2), 11-17. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2010.10.005 pmid: 21035194
[21]	Davis, J. P., Pedersen, E. R., Tucker, J. S., Dunbar, M. S., Seelam, R., Shih, R., & D’Amico, E. J. (2019). Long-term associations between substance use-related media exposure, descriptive norms, and alcohol use from adolescence to young adulthood. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48(7), 1311-1326. doi: 10.1007/s10964-019-01024-z URL
[22]	de Kwaadsteniet, E. W., van Dijk, E., Wit, A., de Cremer, D., & de Rooij, M. (2007). Justifying decisions in social dilemmas: Justification pressures and tacit coordination under environmental uncertainty. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(12), 1648-1660. pmid: 18000100
[23]	Dempsey, R. C., McAlaney, J., & Bewick, B. M. (2018). A critical appraisal of the social norms approach as an interventional strategy for health-related behavior and attitude change. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2180. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02180 pmid: 30459694
[24]	Dillon, C. E., & Lochman, J. E. (2019). Correcting for norm misperception of anti-bullying attitudes. International Journal of Behavioral Development. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025419860598. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025419860598
[25]	Dumas, T. M., Davis, J. P., & Neighbors, C. (2019). How much does your peer group really drink? Examining the relative impact of overestimation, actual group drinking and perceived campus norms on university students’ heavy alcohol use. Addictive Behaviors, 90, 409-414. doi: S0306-4603(18)30774-3 pmid: 30537654
[26]	Enge, S., Mothes, H., Fleischhauer, M., Reif, A., & Strobel, A. (2017). Genetic variation of dopamine and serotonin function modulates the feedback-related negativity during altruistic punishment. Scientific Reports, 7, 2996. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-02594-3 URL
[27]	Falk, A., Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2005). Driving forces behind informal sanctions. Econometrica, 73(6), 2017-2030. doi: 10.1111/ecta.2005.73.issue-6 URL
[28]	Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2003). The nature of human altruism. Nature, 425(6960), 785-791. doi: 10.1038/nature02043 URL
[29]	Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2004). Social norms and human cooperation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(4), 185-190. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.02.007 URL
[30]	Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415(6868), 137-140. doi: 10.1038/415137a URL
[31]	Fehr, E., & Schurtenberger, I. (2018). Normative foundations of human cooperation. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(7), 458-468. doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0385-5 URL
[32]	FeldmanHall, O., Otto, A. R., & Phelps, E. A. (2018). Learning moral values: Another’s desire to punish enhances one’s own punitive behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(8), 1211-1224. doi: 10.1037/xge0000405 URL
[33]	Fischbacher, U. (2007). z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171-178. doi: 10.1007/s10683-006-9159-4 URL
[34]	Fischbacher, U., & Gächter, S. (2010). Social preferences, beliefs, and the dynamics of free riding in public goods experiments. American Economic Review, 100(1), 541-556. doi: 10.1257/aer.100.1.541 URL
[35]	Gächter, S., Kölle, F., & Quercia, S. (2017). Reciprocity and the tragedies of maintaining and providing the commons. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(9), 650-656. doi: 10.1038/s41562-017-0191-5 pmid: 28944297
[36]	Ganz, G., Neville, F. G., Kassanjee, R., & Ward, C. L. (2020). Parental misperceptions of in-group norms for child discipline. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 30(6), 628-644.
[37]	Goeschl, T., Kettner, S. E., Lohse, J., & Schwieren, C. (2018). From social information to social norms: Evidence from two experiments on donation behaviour. Games, 9(4), 91-115. doi: 10.3390/g9040091 URL
[38]	Grimm, V., Utikal, V., & Valmasoni, L. (2017). In-group favoritism and discrimination among multiple out-groups. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 143, 254-271. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2017.08.015 URL
[39]	Henrich, J., & Boyd, R. (2001). Why people punish defectors: Weak conformist transmission can stabilize costly enforcement of norms in cooperative dilemmas. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 208(1), 79-89. pmid: 11162054
[40]	Hu, C. P., Kong, X. Z., Wagenmakers, E. J., Ly, A., & Peng, K. P. (2018). The Bayes factor and its implementation in JASP: A practical primer. Advances in Psychological Science, 26(6), 951-965. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.00951 URL
	[胡传鹏, 孔祥祯, Wagenmakers, E. J., Ly, A., 彭凯平. (2018). 贝叶斯因子及其在JASP中的实现. 心理科学进展, 26(6), 951-965.]
[41]	Hu, J. S., Ye, C., Li, X., & Gao, T. T. (2012). “Irrationality” in justice judgment: Processing mechanisms, main forms and influencing factors. Advances in Psychological Science, 20(5), 726-734. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2012.00726 URL
	[胡金生, 叶春, 李旭, 高婷婷. (2012). 公正判断中的“非理性”: 加工特征、主要表现和影响因素. 心理科学进展, 20(5), 726-734.]
[42]	Huang, F., Chen, X., & Wang, L. (2018). Conditional punishment is a double-edged sword in promoting cooperation. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 528. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-18727-7 pmid: 29323286
[43]	Ji, W. H., Zhang, L. G., & Kou, Y. (2014). How the belief in a just world influence college student’s intention to help people in need: The role of attribution of responsibility and the cost of helping. Psychological Development and Education, 30(5), 496-503.
	[姬旺华, 张兰鸽, 寇彧. (2014). 公正世界信念对大学生助人意愿的影响: 责任归因和帮助代价的作用. 心理发展与教育, 30(5), 496-503.]
[44]	Jiang, R., Liu, R. D., Ding, Y., Zhen, R., Sun, Y., & Fu, X. (2018). Teacher justice and students’ class identification: Belief in a just world and teacher-student relationship as mediators. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 802. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00802 URL
[45]	Jones, P. E. (2004). False consensus in social context: Differential projection and perceived social distance. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43(3), 417-429. doi: 10.1348/0144666042038015 URL
[46]	Jordan, J. J., McAuliffe, K., & Rand, D. G. (2016). The effects of endowment size and strategy method on third party punishment. Experimental Economics, 19(4), 741-763. doi: 10.1007/s10683-015-9466-8 URL
[47]	Kamei, K. (2020). Group size effect and over-punishment in the case of third party enforcement of social norms. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 175, 395-412. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2018.04.002 URL
[48]	Keizer, K., & Schultz, P. W. (2018). Social norms and pro- environmental behaviour. In L. Steg, & J. I. M. de Groot (Eds.), Environmental psychology: An introduction (pp. 179-188). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
[49]	Kenney, S. R., Ott, M., Meisel, M. K., & Barnett, N. P. (2017). Alcohol perceptions and behavior in a residential peer social network. Addictive Behaviors, 64, 143-147. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.08.047 URL
[50]	Kiyonari, T., & Barclay, P. (2008). Cooperation in social dilemmas: Free riding may be thwarted by second-order reward rather than by punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(4), 826-842. doi: 10.1037/a0011381 pmid: 18808262
[51]	Kosfeld, M., & Rustagi, D. (2015). Leader punishment and cooperation in groups: Experimental field evidence from commons management in Ethiopia. American Economic Review, 105(2), 747-783. doi: 10.1257/aer.20120700 URL
[52]	Laninga-Wijnen, L., Harakeh, Z., Dijkstra, J. K., Veenstra, R., & Vollebergh, W. (2018). Aggressive and prosocial peer norms: Change, stability, and associations with adolescent aggressive and prosocial behavior development. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 38(2), 178-203. doi: 10.1177/0272431616665211 URL
[53]	Leary, M. R. (2007). Motivational and emotional aspects of the self. Annual Review of Psychology, 58(1), 317-344. doi: 10.1146/psych.2007.58.issue-1 URL
[54]	Lergetporer, P., Angerer, S., Glätzle-Rützler, D., & Sutter, M. (2014). Third-party punishment increases cooperation in children through (misaligned) expectations and conditional cooperation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(19), 6916-6921. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1320451111 pmid: 24778231
[55]	Lerner, M. J. (1965). Evaluation of performance as a function of performer's reward and attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(4), 355-360. doi: 10.1037/h0021806 URL
[56]	Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85(5), 1030-1051. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.85.5.1030 URL
[57]	Li, J., Li, S., Wang, P., Liu, X., Zhu, C., Niu, X.,... Yin, X. (2018). Fourth-party evaluation of third-party pro-social help and punishment: An ERP study. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 932. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00932 URL
[58]	Li, M. H., & Rao, L. L. (2017). Moral judgment from construal level theory perspective. Advances in Psychological Science, 25(8), 1423-1430. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2017.01423 URL
	[李明晖, 饶俪琳. (2017). 解释水平视角下的道德判断. 心理科学进展, 25(8), 1423-1430.]
[59]	Li, X., Molleman, L., & van Dolder, D. (2021). Do descriptive social norms drive peer punishment? Conditional punishment strategies and their impact on cooperation. Evolution and Human Behavior, 42(5), 469-479. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2021.04.002 URL
[60]	Liang, F. C., Zhou, Y., Wang, J. K., & Tang, W. H. (2016). Just world beliefs and motivation effect of cross-context. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 14(3), 367-371+383.
	[梁福成, 周宇, 王俊坤, 唐卫海. (2016). 公正世界信念与跨情境动机效应. 心理与行为研究, 14(3), 367-371+383.
[61]	Liu, G. Z., Zhang, D. J., Zhu, Z. G., Li, J. J., & Chen, X. (2020). The effect of family socioeconomic status on adolescents’ problem behaviors: The chain mediating role of parental emotional warmth and belief in a just world. Psychological Development and Education, 36(2), 240-248.
	[刘广增, 张大均, 朱政光, 李佳佳, 陈旭. (2020). 家庭社会经济地位对青少年问题行为的影响:父母情感温暖和公正世界信念的链式中介作用. 心理发展与教育, 36(2), 240-248.]
[62]	Liu, L., Chen, X., & Szolnoki, A. (2017). Competitions between prosocial exclusions and punishments in finite populations. Scientific Reports, 7, 46634. doi: 10.1038/srep46634 URL
[63]	Mathew, S. (2017). How the second-order free rider problem is solved in a small-scale society. American Economic Review, 107(5), 578-581. doi: 10.1257/aer.p20171090 URL
[64]	Mathew, S., & Boyd, R. (2011). Punishment sustains large-scale cooperation in prestate warfare. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(28), 11375-11380. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1105604108 pmid: 21670285
[65]	Molho, C., Tybur, J. M., van Lange, P. A., & Balliet, D. (2020). Direct and indirect punishment of norm violations in daily life. Nature Communications, 11, 3432. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-17286-2 URL
[66]	Molleman, L., Kölle, F., Starmer, C., & Gächter, S. (2019). People prefer coordinated punishment in cooperative interactions. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(11), 1145-1153. doi: 10.1038/s41562-019-0707-2 pmid: 31477909
[67]	Neugebauer, T., Perote, J., Schmidt, U., & Loos, M. (2009). Selfish-biased conditional cooperation: On the decline of contributions in repeated public goods experiments. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(1), 52-60. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2008.04.005 URL
[68]	Ozono, H., Jin, N., Watabe, M., & Shimizu, K. (2016). Solving the second-order free rider problem in a public goods game: An experiment using a leader support system. Scientific Reports, 6, 38349. doi: 10.1038/srep38349 URL
[69]	Pfattheicher, S., Sassenrath, C., & Keller, J. (2019). Compassion magnifies third-party punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(1), 124-141. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000165 pmid: 30945902
[70]	Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 717-731. doi: 10.3758/BF03206553 URL
[71]	Przepiorka, W., & Liebe, U. (2016). Generosity is a sign of trustworthiness—The punishment of selfishness is not. Evolution and Human Behavior, 37(4), 255-262. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.12.003 URL
[72]	Rand, D. G. (2016). Cooperation, fast and slow: Meta-analytic evidence for a theory of social heuristics and self-interested deliberation. Psychological Science, 27(9), 1192-1206. doi: 10.1177/0956797616654455 URL
[73]	Rau, R., Nestler, S., Geukes, K., Back, M. D., & Dufner, M. (2019). Can other-derogation be beneficial? Seeing others as low in agency can lead to an agentic reputation in newly formed face-to-face groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(1), 201-227. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000250 URL
[74]	Rimal, R. N., & Lapinski, M. K. (2015). A re-explication of social norms, ten years later. Communication Theory, 25(4), 393-409. doi: 10.1111/comt.2015.25.issue-4 URL
[75]	Sandstrom, M., Makover, H., & Bartini, M. (2013). Social context of bullying: Do misperceptions of group norms influence children’s responses to witnessed episodes? Social Influence, 8(2-3), 196-215. doi: 10.1080/15534510.2011.651302 URL
[76]	Sasaki, T., Uchida, S., & Chen, X. (2015). Voluntary rewards mediate the evolution of pool punishment for maintaining public goods in large populations. Scientific Reports, 5, 8917. doi: 10.1038/srep08917 URL
[77]	Sawitri, D. R., Hadiyanto, H., & Hadi, S. P. (2015). Pro-environmental behavior from a socialcognitive theory perspective. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 23, 27-33. doi: 10.1016/j.proenv.2015.01.005 URL
[78]	Schlag, K. H., Tremewan, J., & van der Weele, J. J. (2015). A penny for your thoughts: A survey of methods for eliciting beliefs. Experimental Economics, 18(3), 457-490. doi: 10.1007/s10683-014-9416-x URL
[79]	Snyder, M., & Swann, W. B. (1978). Behavioral confirmation in social interaction: From social perception to social reality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14(2), 148-162. doi: 10.1016/0022-1031(78)90021-5 URL
[80]	Son, J. Y., Bhandari, A., & FeldmanHall, O. (2019). Crowdsourcing punishment: Individuals reference group preferences to inform their own punitive decisions. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 11625. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-48050-2 URL
[81]	Strelan, P., Di Fiore, C., & Prooijen, J. W. V. (2017). The empowering effect of punishment on forgiveness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 47(4), 472-487. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.v47.4 URL
[82]	Sutton, R. M., & Winnard, E. J. (2007). Looking ahead through lenses of justice: The relevance of just-world beliefs to intentions and confidence in the future. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46(3), 649-666. doi: 10.1348/014466606X166220 URL
[83]	Testé, B., & Perrin, S. (2013). The impact of endorsing the belief in a just world on social judgments. Social Psychology, 44(3), 209-218. doi: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000105 URL
[84]	Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440-463. doi: 10.1037/a0018963 URL
[85]	Tumasjan, A., Strobel, M., & Welpe, I. (2011). Ethical leadership evaluations after moral transgression: Social distance makes the difference. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(4), 609-622. doi: 10.1007/s10551-010-0671-2 URL
[86]	Volk, S., Nguyen, H., & Thöni, C. (2019). Punishment under threat: The role of personality in costly punishment. Journal of Research in Personality, 81, 47-55. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2019.05.005 URL
[87]	Wallace, B., Cesarini, D., Lichtenstein, P., & Johannesson, M. (2007). Heritability of ultimatum game responder behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(40), 15631-15634. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0706642104 pmid: 17909184
[88]	Wen, Z. L., & Ye B. J. (2014). Analyses of mediating effects: The development of methods and models. Advances in Psychological Science, 22(5), 731-745. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2014.00731 URL
	[温忠麟, 叶宝娟. (2014). 中介效应分析: 方法和模型发展. 心理科学进展, 22(5), 731-745.]
[89]	Wu, J., Balliet, D., & van Lange, P. A. (2016). Gossip versus punishment: The efficiency of reputation to promote and maintain cooperation. Scientific Reports, 6, 23919. doi: 10.1038/srep23919 URL
[90]	Wu, J. S., & Wang, N. (2017). The effect of social distance on sexual attribution bias of success or failure. Journal of Psychological Science, 40(5), 1222-1227.
	[吴静珊, 王娜. (2017). 社会距离对成败行为性别归因偏差的影响. 心理科学, 40(5), 1222-1227.]
[91]	Wu, M. S., Yan, X., Zhou, C., Chen, Y., Li, J., Zhu, Z., … Han, B. (2011). General belief in a just world and resilience: Evidence from a collectivistic culture. European Journal of Personality, 25(6), 431-442. doi: 10.1002/per.807 URL
[92]	Wu, P. J., & Li, Ye. (2014). Cultural differences of the belief in a just world. Advances in Psychological Science, 22(11), 1814-1822. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2014.01814 URL
	[吴佩君, 李晔. (2014). 公正世界信念的文化差异. 心理科学进展, 22(11), 1814-1822.]
[93]	Xu, J., Sun, X. C., Dong, Y., Wang, Z. J., Li, W. Q., & Yuan, B. (2017). Compensation or punishment--The effect of social distance on third-party intervention. Journal of Psychological Science, 40(5), 1175-1181.
	[徐杰, 孙向超, 董悦, 汪祚军, 李伟强, 袁博. (2017). 人情与公正的抉择: 社会距离对第三方干预的影响. 心理科学, 40(5), 1175-1181.]
[94]	Zhang, Y., Pan, Z., Li, K., & Guo, Y. (2018). Self-serving bias in memories. Experimental Psychology, 65(4), 236-244. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000409 URL
[95]	Zhou, C. Y., & Guo Y. Y. (2013). Belief in a just world: A double-edged sword for justice restoration. Advances in Psychological Science, 21(1), 144-154. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2013.00144 URL
	[周春燕, 郭永玉. (2013). 公正世界信念——重建公正的双刃剑. 心理科学进展, 21(1), 144-154.]

方案	先惩罚后估计		先估计后惩罚		只惩罚	只估计
方案	惩罚1	估计1	惩罚2	估计2	惩罚3	估计4
10-0	4.19 ± 0.98	3.94 ± 1.08	4.14 ± 1.05	3.90 ± 1.09	4.28 ± 0.97	3.85 ± 1.11
9-1	3.46 ± 1.01	3.22 ± 1.01	3.48 ± 0.95	3.27 ± 0.99	3.50 ± 0.94	3.13 ± 1.03
8-2	2.82 ± 0.94	2.63 ± 0.91	2.80 ± 0.85	2.64 ± 0.93	2.83 ± 0.77	2.60 ± 0.94
7-3	2.00 ± 0.91	1.97 ± 0.85	2.16 ± 0.77	2.07 ± 0.83	2.01 ± 0.79	2.00 ± 0.90
6-4	1.06 ± 0.99	1.16 ± 0.83	1.18 ± 0.81	1.17 ± 0.79	1.17 ± 0.85	1.05 ± 0.71
5-5	0.11 ± 0.44	0.16 ± 0.50	0.20 ± 0.50	0.19 ± 0.44	0.18 ± 0.48	0.17 ± 0.42

方案	先惩罚后估计		先估计后惩罚		只惩罚	只估计
方案	惩罚1	估计1	惩罚2	估计2	惩罚3	估计4
10-0	4.19 ± 0.98	3.94 ± 1.08	4.14 ± 1.05	3.90 ± 1.09	4.28 ± 0.97	3.85 ± 1.11
9-1	3.46 ± 1.01	3.22 ± 1.01	3.48 ± 0.95	3.27 ± 0.99	3.50 ± 0.94	3.13 ± 1.03
8-2	2.82 ± 0.94	2.63 ± 0.91	2.80 ± 0.85	2.64 ± 0.93	2.83 ± 0.77	2.60 ± 0.94
7-3	2.00 ± 0.91	1.97 ± 0.85	2.16 ± 0.77	2.07 ± 0.83	2.01 ± 0.79	2.00 ± 0.90
6-4	1.06 ± 0.99	1.16 ± 0.83	1.18 ± 0.81	1.17 ± 0.79	1.17 ± 0.85	1.05 ± 0.71
5-5	0.11 ± 0.44	0.16 ± 0.50	0.20 ± 0.50	0.19 ± 0.44	0.18 ± 0.48	0.17 ± 0.42

变量	组1 (n = 648)				组2 (n = 684)				合并(N = 1332)
变量	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE
不公平程度	0.81^***	0.02	0.87^***	0.01	0.78^***	0.02	0.81^***	0.01	0.80^***	0.01	0.84^***	0.01
规范错觉			0.79^***	0.03			0.65^***	0.03			0.72^***	0.02
Adj-R²	0.70^***		0.88^***		0.71^***		0.84^***		0.71^***		0.86^***
ΔR²			0.18^***				0.13^***				0.15^***

变量	组1 (n = 648)				组2 (n = 684)				合并(N = 1332)
变量	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE
不公平程度	0.81^***	0.02	0.87^***	0.01	0.78^***	0.02	0.81^***	0.01	0.80^***	0.01	0.84^***	0.01
规范错觉			0.79^***	0.03			0.65^***	0.03			0.72^***	0.02
Adj-R²	0.70^***		0.88^***		0.71^***		0.84^***		0.71^***		0.86^***
ΔR²			0.18^***				0.13^***				0.15^***

方案	B	SE	β	LLCI	ULCI	Adj-R²
10-0	0.75^***	0.04	0.80	0.68	0.82	0.64^***
9-1	0.76^***	0.04	0.78	0.68	0.84	0.60^***
8-2	0.68^***	0.05	0.70	0.58	0.77	0.48^***