Social exploration: How and why people seek new connections.

IF 5.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Psychological review Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI:10.1037/rev0000499
Shelly Tsang,Kyle Barrentine,Sareena Chadha,Shigehiro Oishi,Adrienne Wood
{"title":"Social exploration: How and why people seek new connections.","authors":"Shelly Tsang,Kyle Barrentine,Sareena Chadha,Shigehiro Oishi,Adrienne Wood","doi":"10.1037/rev0000499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Just as animals forage for food, humans forage for social connections. People often face a decision between exploring new relationships versus deepening existing ones. This trade-off, known in optimal foraging theory as the exploration-exploitation trade-off, is featured prominently in other disciplines such as animal foraging, learning, and organizational behavior. Many of the framework's principles can be applied to humans' choices about their social resources, which we call social exploration/exploitation. Using known principles in the domain of social exploration/exploitation can help social psychologists better understand how and why people choose their relationships, which ultimately affect their health and well-being. In this article, we discuss the costs and benefits of social exploration and social exploitation. We then synthesize known person- and situation-level predictors of social decision making, reframing them in the language of the explore-exploit trade-off. We propose that people explore more when they find it more rewarding and less costly, and when the environment has many opportunities to do so. We conclude by discussing hypotheses generated by applying optimal foraging theory to social decision making. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000499","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Just as animals forage for food, humans forage for social connections. People often face a decision between exploring new relationships versus deepening existing ones. This trade-off, known in optimal foraging theory as the exploration-exploitation trade-off, is featured prominently in other disciplines such as animal foraging, learning, and organizational behavior. Many of the framework's principles can be applied to humans' choices about their social resources, which we call social exploration/exploitation. Using known principles in the domain of social exploration/exploitation can help social psychologists better understand how and why people choose their relationships, which ultimately affect their health and well-being. In this article, we discuss the costs and benefits of social exploration and social exploitation. We then synthesize known person- and situation-level predictors of social decision making, reframing them in the language of the explore-exploit trade-off. We propose that people explore more when they find it more rewarding and less costly, and when the environment has many opportunities to do so. We conclude by discussing hypotheses generated by applying optimal foraging theory to social decision making. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
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
社会探索:人们如何以及为何寻求新的联系。
就像动物觅食一样,人类也在寻找社会关系。人们经常要在探索新关系与深化现有关系之间做出抉择。这种权衡在最优觅食理论中被称为探索-开发权衡,在动物觅食、学习和组织行为学等其他学科中也有突出表现。该框架的许多原理都可应用于人类对其社会资源的选择,我们称之为社会探索/开发。在社会探索/开发领域使用已知的原则可以帮助社会心理学家更好地理解人们如何以及为什么选择他们的人际关系,这些关系最终会影响他们的健康和幸福。在本文中,我们将讨论社会探索和社会利用的成本和收益。然后,我们综合了已知的个人和情境层面的社会决策预测因素,并用探索-剥削权衡的语言对其进行了重构。我们提出,当人们发现探索的回报更高、成本更低,而且环境中有很多探索机会时,他们就会进行更多的探索。最后,我们讨论了将最优觅食理论应用于社会决策所产生的假设。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
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
Psychological review
Psychological review 医学-心理学
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: Psychological Review publishes articles that make important theoretical contributions to any area of scientific psychology, including systematic evaluation of alternative theories.
期刊最新文献
The disencapsulated mind: A premotor theory of human imagination. The theory of mind hypothesis of autism: A critical evaluation of the status quo. A unified neurocomputational model of prospective and retrospective timing. Grounding computational cognitive models. As different as fear and anxiety: Introducing the fear and anxiety model of placebo hypoalgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia.
×
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