Agency and Assistance Are Compensatory When They Are Perceived as Substitutable Means: A Response to Commentaries

IF 7.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psychological Inquiry Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/1047840X.2022.2038009
Maxim Milyavsky, Marina Chernikova
{"title":"Agency and Assistance Are Compensatory When They Are Perceived as Substitutable Means: A Response to Commentaries","authors":"Maxim Milyavsky, Marina Chernikova","doi":"10.1080/1047840X.2022.2038009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We are grateful to the commentators for their insightful commentaries. Most of the commentators praised our theory highly and agreed with its basic tenets. They also drew our attention to additional data that supports our theory. Yet, some commentators pointed to data that seems to be at odds with our theory. In what follows, we will set out more clearly the main propositions of the Agency Assistance Model, discuss the new supporting data that we’ve become aware of, and try to clarify the apparent contradictions between our theory and some evidence indicated by the commentators. The starting point of our theory is the idea that human cognition is goal-driven, and that the same goal can be pursued by different means. We tried to explain the relationship between the individual and society from this point of view. To achieve goals, individuals can rely either on their own means or on the means of others. The principle of substitutability of means from Goal Systems Theory describes the relationship between equifinal means as compensatory (Kruglanski et al., 2002; Kruglanski, Chernikova, Babush, Dugas, & Schumpe, 2015). Based on this principle, we derive two hypotheses regarding the relationship between individual and social means. Hypothesis 1 (H1) states that the higher the effectiveness of personal means to achieve the goal(s) (i.e., personal agency), the more an individual can rely on himself to achieve the goal(s), and the higher will be his valuation of the self; as a result, the less s/he needs to rely on others to achieve the goal(s), which accordingly reduces their value in his/her eyes. Analogously, Hypothesis 2 (H2) states that the higher the perceived effectiveness of social means for achieving the goal(s) (i.e., social assistance), the more an individual can rely on social means and the higher will become their worth in his/her eyes; as a result, the less s/he needs to rely on his/her personal means and the lower will be their valuation of the self.","PeriodicalId":48327,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Inquiry","volume":"33 1","pages":"58 - 64"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2022.2038009","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We are grateful to the commentators for their insightful commentaries. Most of the commentators praised our theory highly and agreed with its basic tenets. They also drew our attention to additional data that supports our theory. Yet, some commentators pointed to data that seems to be at odds with our theory. In what follows, we will set out more clearly the main propositions of the Agency Assistance Model, discuss the new supporting data that we’ve become aware of, and try to clarify the apparent contradictions between our theory and some evidence indicated by the commentators. The starting point of our theory is the idea that human cognition is goal-driven, and that the same goal can be pursued by different means. We tried to explain the relationship between the individual and society from this point of view. To achieve goals, individuals can rely either on their own means or on the means of others. The principle of substitutability of means from Goal Systems Theory describes the relationship between equifinal means as compensatory (Kruglanski et al., 2002; Kruglanski, Chernikova, Babush, Dugas, & Schumpe, 2015). Based on this principle, we derive two hypotheses regarding the relationship between individual and social means. Hypothesis 1 (H1) states that the higher the effectiveness of personal means to achieve the goal(s) (i.e., personal agency), the more an individual can rely on himself to achieve the goal(s), and the higher will be his valuation of the self; as a result, the less s/he needs to rely on others to achieve the goal(s), which accordingly reduces their value in his/her eyes. Analogously, Hypothesis 2 (H2) states that the higher the perceived effectiveness of social means for achieving the goal(s) (i.e., social assistance), the more an individual can rely on social means and the higher will become their worth in his/her eyes; as a result, the less s/he needs to rely on his/her personal means and the lower will be their valuation of the self.
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
当代理和援助被视为可替代的手段时,它们是补偿性的:对评论的回应
我们非常感谢解说员的深刻评论。大多数评论家都高度赞扬了我们的理论,并同意它的基本原则。他们还让我们注意到支持我们理论的其他数据。然而,一些评论人士指出,数据似乎与我们的理论不一致。接下来,我们将更清楚地阐述代理协助模型的主要主张,讨论我们已经意识到的新的支持数据,并试图澄清我们的理论与评论者指出的一些证据之间的明显矛盾。我们理论的出发点是人类的认知是目标驱动的,同一个目标可以通过不同的方式来实现。我们试图从这个角度来解释个人与社会的关系。为了实现目标,个人既可以依靠自己的手段,也可以依靠他人的手段。目标系统理论中的手段可替代性原则描述了等最终手段之间的关系,即补偿(Kruglanski et al., 2002;Kruglanski, Chernikova, Babush, Dugas, & Schumpe, 2015)。基于这一原则,我们得出了关于个人和社会手段之间关系的两个假设。假设1 (H1)认为,个人实现目标的手段(即个人代理)的有效性越高,个体就越能依靠自己实现目标,对自我的评价也就越高;因此,他/她越不需要依靠别人来实现目标,这也就降低了他们在他/她眼中的价值。同样,假设2 (H2)表明,个体对实现目标(即社会救助)的社会手段的感知有效性越高,个体对社会手段的依赖程度就越高,个体的价值就越高;因此,他/她对个人手段的依赖越少,他/她对自我的评价就越低。
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 Inquiry
Psychological Inquiry PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
1.10%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Psychological Inquiry serves as an international journal dedicated to the advancement of psychological theory. Each edition features an extensive target article exploring a controversial or provocative topic, accompanied by peer commentaries and a response from the target author(s). Proposals for target articles must be submitted using the Target Article Proposal Form, and only approved proposals undergo peer review by at least three reviewers. Authors are invited to submit their full articles after the proposal has received approval from the Editor.
期刊最新文献
How Prevalent is Social Projection? The Future of Social Perception Models: Further Directions for Theoretical Development of the Inductive Reasoning Model Social Projection and Cognitive Differentiation Co-Explain Self-Enhancement and in-Group Favoritism Three Pokes into the Comfort Zone of the Inductive Reasoning Model Inductive Reasoning Renewed: A Reply to Commentators
×
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