期刊文献+

高共情,更公平:共情特质调节可识别受害者效应引起的资源分配不公 被引量:1

The More Empathic,the Fairer:Empathic Concern Modulates the Identifiable Victim Effect in Resource Allocation
下载PDF
导出
摘要 共情指个体对他人情绪的感知和体验能力。“可识别受害者效应”指相比于抽象模糊的对象,具体特定的对象更容易唤起分配者的共情,并因而获得更多利益的现象。本研究从优先权和分配量两个维度考察了该效应如何影响资源分配决策以及分配者的共情特质在其中的作用。实验中通过是否呈现资源接受者的照片和姓名操纵了对象的可识别性。被试作为分配者需要决定如何将有限的资源分配给两名对象。结果表明:与不可识别对象相比,被试认为可识别对象与自己社会距离更近,并在资源分配中优先考虑可识别对象的需求,给其分配了更多资源。此外,本研究还发现共情关切特质得分越高的人,在分配中越不容易受到可识别性的影响。本研究为如何促进资源的公平分配,维护社会稳定提供了思路。 "Identifiable Victim effect"refers to individuals’tendency to offer greater aid to specific,identifiable victims than to anonymous,statistical victims,which is suggested to be one of the major factors inducing unfairness in resource allocations.The present study examined how the"identifiable victim effect"modulates resource allocation through two experiments.Experiment 1 focused on the priority while experiment 2 focused on the quantity in allocation.Participants played as"resource allocators"and they were instructed to distribute resources to two recipients.One recipient was the identifiable one whose name and image have been shown to the participant,while the other one was the unidentifiable one whose information has not been shown.Here the“resource”was not money but"relieving resources"that can eliminate physiological threats the recipients were facing(e.g.,painful electrical shocks in Experiment 1 and unpleasant noise in Experiment 2).In Experiment 1,two recipients would receive the same number of painful electrical shocks.The participants were endowed with the“relieving resource”that can eliminate one or two electric shocks for one recipient.They were not aware of whether they can eliminate 1 or 2 shocks before they made their first decision.We would mainly focus on how they weighted the priority of allocation by examining which recipient would receive their first aid(i.e.they would eliminate the first electric shock for which recipient).In Experiment 2,two recipients were facing the threat of unpleasant noise while the"relieving resources"were only enough for eliminating all of the noise for one recipient.We would mainly focus on how the participants would distribute the limited relieving resource between the identifiable and unidentifiable recipients.Results of Experiments 1 and 2 revealed that the"identifiable victim effect"does lead to unfairness in resource allocation.Compared to the unidentifiable victim,the identifiable victims get more attention from the allocator and were felt closer to them thus getting higher priority and more quantity of resources.Interestingly,we also found that in Experiment 1 when the participants get the extra resource,he/she would compensate the unidentifiable victim who was neglected in their first aid.Importantly,we found that one sub-component of empathy(i.e.,empathic concern)plays a moderating role in the identifiable victim effect in resource allocation,such that people with higher scores of empathic concerns were less influenced by the identifiability of the victims,thus behaving more fairly.These findings have implications for future research in the field of empathy.That is,we should deeply explore the driving role of each sub-component of empathy on social behavior to more comprehensively and deeply understand the complex psychological mechanism of empathy.It also sheds light on how to promote fairness in resource allocation to maintain social stability.
作者 徐雅诗 赵海玲 刘洁 崔芳 Xu Yashi;Zhao Hailing;Liu Jie;Cui Fang(School of Psychology,Shenzhen University,Shenzhen,518060)
出处 《心理科学》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2023年第2期427-434,共8页 Journal of Psychological Science
基金 国家自然科学基金面上项目(32171013,31871109) 深圳市自然科学面上项目(JCYJ20210308103903001)的资助。
关键词 共情 可识别受害者效应 资源分配 公平 社会距离 empathy identifiable victim effect resource allocation fairness social distance
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献73

  • 1温忠麟,张雷,侯杰泰,刘红云.中介效应检验程序及其应用[J].心理学报,2004,36(5):614-620. 被引量:7723
  • 2[14]侯玉波.社会心理学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
  • 3Boksem, M. A. S., & De Cremer, D. (2010). Fairness concerns predict medial frontal negativity amplitude in ultimatum bargaining. Social Neuroscience, 5(1), 118-128.
  • 4Boudreau, C., McCubbins, M. D., & Coulson, S. (2009). Knowing when to trust others: An ERP study of decision making after receiving information from unknown people. Social Coenitive. and Affective Neuroscience. 4(1~. 23-34.
  • 5Cacioppo, J. T., Crites, S. L., Jr., & Gardner, W. L. (1996). Attitudes to the right: Evaluative processing is associated with lateralized late positive event-related brain potentials. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(12), 1205-1219.
  • 6Clark, V. P., & Hillyard, S. A. (1996). Spatial selective attention affects early extrastriate but not striate components of the visual evoked potential. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 387-402.
  • 7Cunningham, W. A., Espinet, S. D., DeYoung, C. G., & Zelazo, P. D. (2005). Attitudes to the rightand left: Frontal ERP asymmetries associated with stimulus valence and processin~ ~oals. Neurolmage, 28(4), 827-834.
  • 8de Pascalis, V., Strelau, J., & Zawadzki, B. (1999). The effect of temperamental traits on event-related potentials, heart rate and reaction time. Personality and Individual Differences, 26, 441-465.
  • 9Dreisbach, G., & Goschke, T modulates cognitive control (2004). How positive affect Reduced perseveration at the cost of increased distractibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(2), 343-353.
  • 10Fehr, E., & Gachter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415(6868), 137-140.

共引文献49

同被引文献18

引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部