社会善念的研究现状及展望
Research Status and Prospect of Social Mindfulness
DOI: 10.12677/AP.2020.108127, PDF,  被引量    国家自然科学基金支持
作者: 田 一：北京教育科学研究院北京市教育督导与教育质量评价研究中心，北京；北京师范大学心理学部，应用实验心理北京市重点实验室，心理学国家级实验教学示范中心(北京师范大学)，北京；王 莉：北京体育大学心理学院，北京；许 燕*：北京师范大学心理学部，应用实验心理北京市重点实验室，心理学国家级实验教学示范中心(北京师范大学)，北京
关键词: 社会善念；特质状态；测量方式；认知加工；Social Mindfulness； Trait-State Structure； Measurement Method； Cognitive Process
摘要: 社会善念是指个体所具备的良好品质反映在人际互动情境中能够感知他人状态，愿意尊重对方选择、做出让渡权利行动的善意。本文试图理清社会善念的概念内涵并追根溯源其理论基础，从表现特征、测量范式、认知加工特征和相关因素进行了综述。已有研究表明，社会善念具备特质和状态的表现特征；研究范式应关注文化背景的影响，且社会善念具备直觉或控制加工的认知特征。在影响因素方面，除了传统的认知、人格影响因素外，更关注社会环境因素的影响。最后，本研究强调未来研究应着重考察社会善念的特质状态结构、研究范式的中国化和潜在的影响机制等方面。
Abstract: Social mindfulness refers to the good quality of an individual reflected in the interpersonal interaction situation to be able to sense others’ state, willing to respect other’s choice and make the action of transferring rights. This article attempts to clarify the conceptual connotation of social mindfulness and trace its roots to its theoretical basis. It summarizes from performance characteristics, measurement paradigms, cognitive processing characteristics and related factors. Previous studies have shown that social mindfulness has the traits-states structure; the research paradigm should pay attention to the influence of cultural background, and has the cognitive characteristics of intuition or control processing. In terms of influencing factors, in addition to traditional cognitive and personality influencing factors, more attention is paid to the influence of social environmental factors. Finally, this study emphasizes that future research should focus on aspects, such as the trait-state structure of social mindfulness, the sinicization of research paradigms, and potential impact mechanisms.
文章引用：田一, 王莉, 许燕 (2020). 社会善念的研究现状及展望. 心理学进展, 10(8), 1069-1078. https://doi.org/10.12677/AP.2020.108127

参考文献

[1] 陈满琪(2016). 社会正念及其与道德关系的研究. 中国社会心理学评论, (1), 151-164.
[2] 陈雅姣(2019). 感知社会正念和心理距离对大学生信任修复的影响. 硕士学位论文, 上海: 上海师范大学.
[3] 仇不凡(2019). 藏族学生的社会善念及合作行为研究. 硕士学位论文, 石家庄: 河北师范大学.
[4] 窦凯(2016). 感知社会正念: 有效促进合作行为的心理机制. 硕士学位论文, 广州: 暨南大学.
[5] 窦凯, 刘耀中, 王玉洁, 聂衍刚(2018a). “乐”于合作: 感知社会善念诱导合作行为的情绪机制. 心理学报, 50(1), 101-114.
[6] 窦凯, 聂衍刚, 王玉洁, 刘耀中(2018b). 信任还是设防?互动博弈中社会善念对合作行为的促进效应. 心理科学, 41(2), 390-396.
[7] 窦凯, 聂衍刚, 王玉洁, 张庆鹏(2017). 人际互动中的社会善念: 概念、测评及影响机制. 心理学进展, 7(9), 1101-1112.
[8] 黎建斌(2013). 自我控制资源与认知资源相互影响的机制: 整合模型. 心理科学进展, 21(2), 235-242.
[9] 刘嘉(2018). 社会阶层对社会正念的影响: 合作/竞争的作用. 硕士学位论文, 银川: 宁夏大学.
[10] 彭凯平(2009). 经济人的心理博弈: 社会心理学对经济学的贡献与挑战. 中国人民大学学报, (3), 67-75.
[11] 任彧(2017). 社会正念中的利他选择综述. 科教导刊(中旬刊), (5), 147-148.
[12] Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2001). A Theoretical Basis for the Major Dimensions of Personality. European Journal of Personality, 15, 327-353.
[CrossRef] 
[13] Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2007). Empirical, Theoretical, and Practical Advantages of the HEXACO Model of Personality Structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 150-166.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[14] Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & De Vries, R. E. (2014). The HEXACO Honesty-Humility, Agreeableness, and Emotionality Factors: A Review of Research and Theory. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18, 139-152.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[15] Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., & Tice, D. M. (2007). The Strength Model of Self-Control. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 351-355.
[CrossRef] 
[16] Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Overview of Self-Determination Theory: An Organismic-Dialectical Perspective. In E. L. Deci, & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Determination Research (pp. 3-33). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
[17] Dorothee, M., & Andreas, G. (2016). Spontaneous Cooperation for Prosocials, But Not for Proselfs: Social Value Orientation Moderates Spontaneous Cooperation Behavior. Scientific Reports, 6, Article No. 21555.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Dou, K., Wang, Y. J., Li, J. B., Li, J. J., & Nie, Y. G. (2018). Perceiving High Social Mindfulness during Interpersonal Interaction Promotes Cooperative Behaviours. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 97-106.
[CrossRef] 
[19] Eek, D., & Gärling, T. (2006). Prosocials Prefer Equal Outcomes to Maximizing Joint Outcomes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 321-337.
[CrossRef] 
[20] Fehr, E., Naef, M., & Schmidt, K. M. (2006). Inequality Aversion, Efficiency, and Maximin Preferences in Simple Distribution Experiments: Comment. American Economic Review, 96, 1912-1917.
[CrossRef] 
[21] Guinote, A., Cotzia, I., Sandhu, S., & Siwa, P. (2015). Social Status Modulates Prosocial Behavior and Egalitarianism in Preschool Children and Adults. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112, 731-736.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[22] Hashimoto, H., Li, Y., & Yamagishi, T. (2011). Beliefs and Preferences in Cultural Agents and Cultural Game Players. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 14, 140-147.
[CrossRef] 
[23] Hauge, K. E., Brekke, K. A., Johansson, L.-O., Johansson-Stenman, O., & Svedsäter, H. (2009). Are Social Preferences Skin Deep? Dictators under Cognitive Load. Working Papers in Economics 371.
[24] Hertwig, R., & Hoffrage, U. (2013). Simple Heuristics: The Foundations of Adaptive Social Behavior. In Simple Heuristics in a Social World (pp. 3-36). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[CrossRef] 
[25] Imke, L. J., Anne-Kathrin, J. F., Niels, J. V. D., Paul, A. M. V. L., Dick, J. V., & Lydia, K. (2019). Social Mindfulness and Psychosis: Neural Response to Socially Mindful Behavior in First-Episode Psychosis and Patients at Clinical High-Risk. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 13, Article 47.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] Kim, H., & Markus, H. R. (1999). Deviance or Uniqueness, Harmony or Conformity? A Cultural Analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 785.
[CrossRef] 
[27] Lemmers-Jansen, I. L. J., Krabbendam, L., Amodio, D. M., Van Doesum, N. J., Veltman, D. J., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2018). Giving Others the Option of Choice: An fMRI Study on Low-Cost Cooperation. Neuropsychologia, 109, 1-9.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[28] Magee, J. C., & Langner, C. A. (2008). How Personalized and Socialized Power Motivation Facilitate Antisocial and Prosocial Decision-Making. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1547-1559.
[CrossRef] 
[29] Manesi, Z., Van Lange, P. A. M., Van Doesum, N. J., & Pollet, T. V. (2019). What Are the Most Powerful Predictors of Charitable Giving to Victims of Typhoon Haiyan: Prosocial Traits, Socio-Demographic Variables, or Eye Cues? Personality and Individual Differences, 146, 217-225.
[CrossRef] 
[30] Mischkowski, D., Thielmann, I., & Glöckner, A. (2018). Think It through before Making a Choice? Processing Mode Does Not Influence Social Mindfulness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 74, 85-97.
[CrossRef] 
[31] Murphy, R. O., Ackermann, K. A., & Handgraaf, M. J. J. (2011). Measuring Social Value Orientation. Judgment and Decision Making, 6, 771-781.
[CrossRef] 
[32] Pronk, T. M., Karremans, J. C., Overbeek, G., Vermulst, A. A., & Wigboldus, D. H. (2010). What It Takes to Forgive: When and Why Executive Functioning Facilitates Forgiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 119.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[33] Rand, D. G., Greene, J. D., & Nowak, M. A. (2012). Spontaneous Giving and Calculated Greed. Nature, 489, 427.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[34] Smith, E. E., & Jonides, J. (1999). Storage and Executive Processes in the Frontal Lobes. Science, 283, 1657-1661.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[35] Stephens, N. M., Markus, H. R., & Phillips, L. T. (2014). Social Class Culture Cycles: How Three Gateway Contexts Shape Selves and Fuel Inequality. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 611-634.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[36] Van Doesum, N. J. (2016). Social Mindfulness. Ipskamp drukkers BV.
[37] Van Doesum, N. J., de Vries, R. E., Blokland, A. A. J., Hill, J. M., Kuhlman, D. M., Stivers, A. W., Van Lange, P. A. M. et al. (2019). Social Mindfulness: Prosocial the Active Way. Journal of Positive Psychology.
[CrossRef] 
[38] Van Doesum, N. J., Tybur, J. M., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2017). Class Impressions: Higher Social Class Elicits Lower Prosociality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 68, 11-20.
[CrossRef] 
[39] Van Doesum, N. J., Van Lange, D. A. W., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2013). Social Mindfulness: Skill and Will to Navigate the Social World. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 86-103.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[40] Van Doesum, N. J., Van Prooijen, J. W., Verburgh, L., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2016). Social Hostility in Soccer and Beyond. PLoS ONE, 11, e0153577.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[41] Van Lange, P. A. M., & Balliet, D. (2015). Interdependence Theory. In APA Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology, Volume 3: Interpersonal Relations (pp. 65-92). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
[CrossRef] 
[42] Van Lange, P. A. M., Kruglanski, A. W., & Higgins, E. T. (2011). Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology: Volume One. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
[CrossRef] 
[43] Van Lange, P. A. M., & Van Doesum, N. J. (2012). The Psychology of Interaction Goals Comes as a Package. Psychological Inquiry, 23, 75-79.
[CrossRef] 
[44] Van Lange, P. A. M., & Van Doesum, N. J. (2015). Social Mindfulness and Social Hostility. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3, 18-24.
[CrossRef] 
[45] Zaki, J., & Mitchell, J. P. (2013). Intuitive Prosociality. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 466-470.
[CrossRef]