代理与共融在人性概念化中的作用——一种多尺度、多方法的途径

Magdalena Formanowicz , Maria Laura Bettinsoli , Agnieszka Pietraszkiewicz , Tamar Saguy
{"title":"代理与共融在人性概念化中的作用——一种多尺度、多方法的途径","authors":"Magdalena Formanowicz ,&nbsp;Maria Laura Bettinsoli ,&nbsp;Agnieszka Pietraszkiewicz ,&nbsp;Tamar Saguy","doi":"10.1016/j.cresp.2023.100151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Among the main factors considered as predictors of humanness attribution were agency and communion. Agency constitutes an ability to affect one's own situation and communion an ability to form meaningful relationships with others. Seen as a cross-culturally universal framework for how people construe the world, these dimensions have been theorized to be pivotal for seeing others as humans and accordingly as less than humans. However, research testing the predictive power of agency and communion (or more fine-grained distinction of sociability and morality) for humanness ratings is showing a complex picture. Part of this complexity can be attributed to non-independence of measures used in previous research, as some traits pertaining to agency and communion were also used in measuring humanness perception, thus posing a risk of multicollinearity. Furthermore, the strength of the relationship of agency and communion with humanness conceptualizations was never tested, thus not allowing to compare which (if any) predictor is stronger. To address these limitations, we asked participants to rate our focal variables both at trait and group levels (4 studies; <em>N</em><sub>tot</sub> = 2565) in which we test the association of agency, communion (as well as morality and sociability), and different humanness measures. Across all studies, we also tested the strength of the relationship of agency and communion with humanness conceptualizations finding a stable and equal in strength relationship of agency and communion with humanness attribution.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72748,"journal":{"name":"Current research in ecological and social psychology","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100151"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of agency and communion in humanness conceptualization- a multi-measure and method approach\",\"authors\":\"Magdalena Formanowicz ,&nbsp;Maria Laura Bettinsoli ,&nbsp;Agnieszka Pietraszkiewicz ,&nbsp;Tamar Saguy\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cresp.2023.100151\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Among the main factors considered as predictors of humanness attribution were agency and communion. Agency constitutes an ability to affect one's own situation and communion an ability to form meaningful relationships with others. Seen as a cross-culturally universal framework for how people construe the world, these dimensions have been theorized to be pivotal for seeing others as humans and accordingly as less than humans. However, research testing the predictive power of agency and communion (or more fine-grained distinction of sociability and morality) for humanness ratings is showing a complex picture. Part of this complexity can be attributed to non-independence of measures used in previous research, as some traits pertaining to agency and communion were also used in measuring humanness perception, thus posing a risk of multicollinearity. Furthermore, the strength of the relationship of agency and communion with humanness conceptualizations was never tested, thus not allowing to compare which (if any) predictor is stronger. To address these limitations, we asked participants to rate our focal variables both at trait and group levels (4 studies; <em>N</em><sub>tot</sub> = 2565) in which we test the association of agency, communion (as well as morality and sociability), and different humanness measures. Across all studies, we also tested the strength of the relationship of agency and communion with humanness conceptualizations finding a stable and equal in strength relationship of agency and communion with humanness attribution.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72748,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current research in ecological and social psychology\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100151\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current research in ecological and social psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666622723000643\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current research in ecological and social psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666622723000643","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

被认为是人性归因的主要预测因子是代理和共融。能动性是一种影响自己处境的能力,而共融是一种与他人建立有意义关系的能力。这些维度被看作是人们如何理解世界的跨文化通用框架,被理论化为将他人视为人类和相应的非人类的关键。然而,测试代理和交流(或社交和道德的更细致区分)对人性评级的预测能力的研究显示出一幅复杂的画面。这种复杂性的部分原因可以归因于之前研究中使用的测量方法的不独立性,因为一些与代理和交流有关的特征也被用于测量人类感知,从而带来多重共线性的风险。此外,代理和交流与人性概念化的关系的强度从未被测试过,因此不允许比较哪个(如果有的话)预测器更强。为了解决这些局限性,我们要求参与者在特质和群体水平上对我们的焦点变量进行评分(4项研究;ntt = 2565),我们测试了代理、交流(以及道德和社交能力)和不同的人性指标之间的联系。在所有研究中,我们还测试了代理和共融与人性概念化的关系强度,发现代理和共融与人性归因的关系强度稳定且相等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
The role of agency and communion in humanness conceptualization- a multi-measure and method approach

Among the main factors considered as predictors of humanness attribution were agency and communion. Agency constitutes an ability to affect one's own situation and communion an ability to form meaningful relationships with others. Seen as a cross-culturally universal framework for how people construe the world, these dimensions have been theorized to be pivotal for seeing others as humans and accordingly as less than humans. However, research testing the predictive power of agency and communion (or more fine-grained distinction of sociability and morality) for humanness ratings is showing a complex picture. Part of this complexity can be attributed to non-independence of measures used in previous research, as some traits pertaining to agency and communion were also used in measuring humanness perception, thus posing a risk of multicollinearity. Furthermore, the strength of the relationship of agency and communion with humanness conceptualizations was never tested, thus not allowing to compare which (if any) predictor is stronger. To address these limitations, we asked participants to rate our focal variables both at trait and group levels (4 studies; Ntot = 2565) in which we test the association of agency, communion (as well as morality and sociability), and different humanness measures. Across all studies, we also tested the strength of the relationship of agency and communion with humanness conceptualizations finding a stable and equal in strength relationship of agency and communion with humanness attribution.

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
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
140 days
期刊最新文献
Consequences of group-based misperceptions of climate concern for efficacy and action Table of Contents Nonverbal facial cues signaling sexually transmitted infections cause dehumanization and discrimination Should we talk (more) about climate change when promoting energy conservation? An intervention in Swiss households The proximal distant: How does remote acculturation affect wellbeing in the multicultural context of Lebanon?
×
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