Money Versus Time: The Effects of Social Media Exclusion on Mental Construal and Donation Behaviors

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2024-06-23 DOI:10.1002/bdm.2396
Dajun Li, Nan Zhang, Huihui Li
{"title":"Money Versus Time: The Effects of Social Media Exclusion on Mental Construal and Donation Behaviors","authors":"Dajun Li,&nbsp;Nan Zhang,&nbsp;Huihui Li","doi":"10.1002/bdm.2396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>The development of social media platforms has ushered in a new era in which online media interactions, such as Facebook and Twitter, have largely supplanted traditional means of interpersonal interaction. This has resulted in problems such as cyberbullying and social exclusion. Previous research has indicated that people who feel socially excluded react more positively to altruistic behaviors, which could effectively restore connection and happiness from the exclusion. This study investigates two distinct types of social media exclusion (being rejected vs. being ignored) to determine their subsequent donation preferences (money vs. time). In three substudies, this study explores donation behaviors and demonstrates that people who feel socially rejected (ignored) react more positively to the donation of money (time). Study 1 reveals that being rejected (ignored) by social media leads people to form low (high)-level mental construals, resulting in preferences for the donation of money (time). Study 2 examines how matching the exclusion type with the abstractness of appeals (abstract vs. concrete) affects donation preference. Similarly, Study 3 demonstrates the matching effects of exclusion type and the temporal distance of appeals (current vs. future) on subsequent charitable behaviors. Charitable fundraisers are advised to align their charitable appeals with people's construal levels to help these excluded media users not only reconnect their belonging with the community but also recover their happiness after the exclusion experiences.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"37 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.2396","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The development of social media platforms has ushered in a new era in which online media interactions, such as Facebook and Twitter, have largely supplanted traditional means of interpersonal interaction. This has resulted in problems such as cyberbullying and social exclusion. Previous research has indicated that people who feel socially excluded react more positively to altruistic behaviors, which could effectively restore connection and happiness from the exclusion. This study investigates two distinct types of social media exclusion (being rejected vs. being ignored) to determine their subsequent donation preferences (money vs. time). In three substudies, this study explores donation behaviors and demonstrates that people who feel socially rejected (ignored) react more positively to the donation of money (time). Study 1 reveals that being rejected (ignored) by social media leads people to form low (high)-level mental construals, resulting in preferences for the donation of money (time). Study 2 examines how matching the exclusion type with the abstractness of appeals (abstract vs. concrete) affects donation preference. Similarly, Study 3 demonstrates the matching effects of exclusion type and the temporal distance of appeals (current vs. future) on subsequent charitable behaviors. Charitable fundraisers are advised to align their charitable appeals with people's construal levels to help these excluded media users not only reconnect their belonging with the community but also recover their happiness after the exclusion experiences.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
金钱与时间:社交媒体排斥对心理构想和捐赠行为的影响
社交媒体平台的发展开创了一个新时代,Facebook 和 Twitter 等网络媒体的互动在很大程度上取代了传统的人际互动方式。这导致了网络欺凌和社会排斥等问题。以往的研究表明,感到被社会排斥的人对利他主义行为的反应更为积极,这可以有效地从排斥中恢复联系和快乐。本研究调查了两种不同类型的社交媒体排斥(被拒绝与被忽视),以确定他们随后的捐赠偏好(金钱与时间)。在三项子研究中,本研究探讨了捐赠行为,并证明感觉被社交媒体排斥(被忽视)的人对捐赠金钱(时间)的反应更积极。研究 1 显示,被社交媒体拒绝(忽视)会导致人们形成低(高)层次的心理构想,从而产生捐赠金钱(时间)的偏好。研究 2 探讨了排斥类型与呼吁抽象程度(抽象与具体)的匹配如何影响捐赠偏好。同样,研究 3 显示了排除类型与呼吁的时间距离(当前与未来)对后续慈善行为的匹配效应。建议慈善募捐者将其慈善呼吁与人们的构想水平相匹配,以帮助这些被排斥的媒体用户不仅能重新建立与社区的归属感,还能在被排斥经历后恢复幸福感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Journal of Behavioral Decision Making is a multidisciplinary journal with a broad base of content and style. It publishes original empirical reports, critical review papers, theoretical analyses and methodological contributions. The Journal also features book, software and decision aiding technique reviews, abstracts of important articles published elsewhere and teaching suggestions. The objective of the Journal is to present and stimulate behavioral research on decision making and to provide a forum for the evaluation of complementary, contrasting and conflicting perspectives. These perspectives include psychology, management science, sociology, political science and economics. Studies of behavioral decision making in naturalistic and applied settings are encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Do We Use Relatively Bad (Algorithmic) Advice? The Effects of Performance Feedback and Advice Representation on Advice Usage Evaluation of Extended Decision Outcomes Diffusion of Responsibility for Actions With Advice Dynamics of Reliance on Algorithmic Advice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1