情感与亲社会行为:决策模式与个体加工风格的作用

IF 1.9 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1017/s1930297500008998
Manja Gärtner, D. Andersson, D. Västfjäll, G. Tinghög
{"title":"情感与亲社会行为:决策模式与个体加工风格的作用","authors":"Manja Gärtner, D. Andersson, D. Västfjäll, G. Tinghög","doi":"10.1017/s1930297500008998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n We study the effects of experimental manipulation of decision mode\n (rational “brain” vs. affective “heart”) and individual difference in\n processing styles (intuition vs. deliberation) on prosocial behavior. In a\n survey experiment with a diverse sample of the Swedish population\n (n = 1,828), we elicited the individuals’\n processing style and we experimentally manipulated reliance on affect or\n reason, regardless of subjects’ preferred mode. Prosocial behavior was\n measured across a series of commonly used and incentivized games (prisoner’s\n dilemma game, public goods game, trust game, dictator game). Our results\n show that prosocial behavior increased for the affective (“heart”) decision\n mode. Further, individual differences in processing style did not predict\n prosocial behavior and did not interact with the experimental\n manipulation.","PeriodicalId":48045,"journal":{"name":"Judgment and Decision Making","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Affect and prosocial behavior: The role of decision mode and individual\\n processing style\",\"authors\":\"Manja Gärtner, D. Andersson, D. Västfjäll, G. Tinghög\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s1930297500008998\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n We study the effects of experimental manipulation of decision mode\\n (rational “brain” vs. affective “heart”) and individual difference in\\n processing styles (intuition vs. deliberation) on prosocial behavior. In a\\n survey experiment with a diverse sample of the Swedish population\\n (n = 1,828), we elicited the individuals’\\n processing style and we experimentally manipulated reliance on affect or\\n reason, regardless of subjects’ preferred mode. Prosocial behavior was\\n measured across a series of commonly used and incentivized games (prisoner’s\\n dilemma game, public goods game, trust game, dictator game). Our results\\n show that prosocial behavior increased for the affective (“heart”) decision\\n mode. Further, individual differences in processing style did not predict\\n prosocial behavior and did not interact with the experimental\\n manipulation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48045,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Judgment and Decision Making\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Judgment and Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1930297500008998\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Judgment and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1930297500008998","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

研究了决策模式(理性“脑”vs情感“心”)的实验操作和加工方式(直觉vs深思)的个体差异对亲社会行为的影响。在一项针对瑞典人口(n = 1828)的不同样本的调查实验中,我们引出了个人的处理风格,并通过实验操纵了对情感或理性的依赖,而不考虑受试者的偏好模式。亲社会行为是通过一系列常用的激励游戏(囚徒困境游戏、公共物品游戏、信任游戏、独裁者游戏)来衡量的。我们的研究结果表明,亲社会行为在情感(“心”)决策模式下增加。此外,加工风格的个体差异并不能预测亲社会行为,也与实验操作没有相互作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Affect and prosocial behavior: The role of decision mode and individual processing style
We study the effects of experimental manipulation of decision mode (rational “brain” vs. affective “heart”) and individual difference in processing styles (intuition vs. deliberation) on prosocial behavior. In a survey experiment with a diverse sample of the Swedish population (n = 1,828), we elicited the individuals’ processing style and we experimentally manipulated reliance on affect or reason, regardless of subjects’ preferred mode. Prosocial behavior was measured across a series of commonly used and incentivized games (prisoner’s dilemma game, public goods game, trust game, dictator game). Our results show that prosocial behavior increased for the affective (“heart”) decision mode. Further, individual differences in processing style did not predict prosocial behavior and did not interact with the experimental manipulation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Judgment and Decision Making
Judgment and Decision Making PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
The benefits of deciding now and not later: The influence of the timing between acquiring knowledge and deciding on decision confidence, omission neglect bias, and choice deferral I want to believe: Prior beliefs influence judgments about the effectiveness of both alternative and scientific medicine The final step effect Choosing more aggressive commitment contracts for others than for the self Systematic metacognitive reflection helps people discover far-sighted decision strategies: A process-tracing experiment
×
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