期刊文献+

合作中责任比较和分配评价差异的ERPs研究 被引量:1

Differences of Responsibility Comparison and Distribution Evaluation in Cooperation:An ERPs study
下载PDF
导出
摘要 为了考察在合作任务中,个体对任务结果的比较阶段及分配阶段的脑电变化,本研究采用事件相关电位技术,考察三个任务变量:情境(贡献、责任)、比较(大、小)、分配(贡献原则、平均原则)对合作结果评价的影响。结果发现,责任比贡献诱发更大的FRN和更小的P3;贡献大小诱发的FRN和P3无差异,但责任大比责任小诱发更大的FRN和更小的P3。分配评价阶段,罚金反馈比奖金反馈诱发更大的FRN,基于贡献(责任)分配比基于平均分配的方案诱发出更大的P3。这表明合作背景中仅在责任比较中表现出自我服务偏向,在分配评价阶段未显示自我服务偏向。 Using the event-related potential(ERP)technique,the present study investigated how context-based social comparison and distribution affect individuals’outcome evaluation in a cooperative task and their associated EEG responses.Three task variables including context(contribution vs.responsibility),comparison(more vs.less)and distributive principle(equity vs.equality)were manipulated.The results revealed that compared to the contribution based context,responsibility induced larger FRN and smaller P3;furthermore,there was no difference in terms of FRN and P3 induced by more or less contribution.However,the more responsibility condition triggered larger FRN and smaller P3 than the less responsibility condition.In the distribution phase,feedback by monetary penalty elicited larger FRN than feedback by monetary rewards,and the equity based principle elicited larger P3 than the equality based principle.These results indicate that self-service bias appears only in the responsibility comparison rather than the distributive evaluation.
作者 陈衍 江婷 李玮 陈取麟 潘运 胡思瑶 CHEN Yan;JIANG Ting;LI Wei;CHEN Qulin;PAN Yun;HU Siyao(School of Psychology,Guizhou Normal University,Guiyang 550025)
出处 《心理与行为研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2021年第2期152-159,共8页 Studies of Psychology and Behavior
基金 贵州省教育厅高等学校人文社科科学研究硕士点项目(2018ssd24)。
关键词 合作 责任比较 贡献原则 事件相关电位 cooperation responsibility comparison equity based principle ERPs
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

二级参考文献110

  • 1周浩,龙立荣,王燕,王忠军,吴怡,柯善玉.分配公正、程序公正、互动公正影响效果的差异[J].心理学报,2005,37(5):687-693. 被引量:38
  • 2谢义忠,萧爱鈴,任孝鹏,时勘.程序公平对工作满意度、组织承诺的影响:工作不安全感的中介作用[J].中国临床心理学杂志,2007,15(2):138-141. 被引量:24
  • 3Boksem, M. A. S., & De Cremer, D. (2010). Fairness concerns predict medial frontal negativity amplitude in ultimatum bargaining. Social Neuroscience, 5(1), 118-128. 被引量:1
  • 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. 被引量:1
  • 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. 被引量:1
  • 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. 被引量:1
  • 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. 被引量:1
  • 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. 被引量:1
  • 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. 被引量:1
  • 10Fehr, E., & Gachter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415(6868), 137-140. 被引量:1

共引文献38

同被引文献6

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