群体认同测量与操纵方法的系统述评
A Systematic Review of Measurement and Manipulation Methods for Group Identification
DOI: 10.12677/ap.2025.1511586, PDF,    科研立项经费支持
作者: 茹怡珊*, 张诗雪, 张倍佳, 绳 慧:中国人民解放军陆军工程大学石家庄校区,河北 石家庄
关键词: 群体认同测量方法实验操纵文化适应性三角验证Group Identity Measurement Methods Experimental Manipulation Cultural Adaptability Triangulation
摘要: 群体认同是理解群际关系的核心构念,当前研究方法体系源于西方个体主义文化,在中国集体主义情境下面临文化适应性缺陷与动态性捕捉不足的挑战。本文采用系统述评方法,先基于社会认同理论与自我分类理论梳理群体认同研究方法论的理论根基;接着将测量方法分为外显、内隐、行为与生理四类,操纵范式分为基础激活与情境调节两类,并从效度、信度、生态效度、文化适用性与操作可行性五个维度对各类方法进行批判性比较。本文提出,整合“理论–操纵–多方法测量”的三角验证策略是未来研究的黄金标准,要结合中国文化“集体联结”要素对现有方法进行本土化修订。最后,展望了虚拟现实、经验取样法与人工智能等前沿技术在捕捉认同动态性与交叉性方面的应用前景,旨在为构建有中国文化特色的群体认同方法学体系提供理论指导与实践启示。
Abstract: Group identity is a core construct for understanding intergroup relations. The current research methodology system originates from Western individualistic culture and faces challenges of deficiencies in cultural adaptability and inadequacies in capturing dynamics in the context of Chinese collectivism. This study adopts a systematic review approach: first, it sorts out the theoretical foundations of group identity research methodology based on Social Identity Theory and Self-Categorization Theory; second, it classifies measurement methods into four categories (explicit, implicit, behavioral, and physiological) and manipulation paradigms into two categories (basic activation and contextual modulation), and then conducts a critical comparison of various methods from five dimensions, namely validity, reliability, ecological validity, cultural applicability, and operational feasibility. This study proposes that the triangulation strategy integrating “theory-manipulation-multimethod measurement” is the gold standard for future research, and it is necessary to conduct localized revisions of existing methods by incorporating the “collective connection” element of Chinese culture. Finally, it prospects the application potential of cutting-edge technologies such as virtual reality (VR), experience sampling method (ESM), and artificial intelligence (AI) in capturing the dynamics and intersectionality of identity. The purpose of this study is to provide theoretical guidance and practical implications for constructing a methodology system for group identity with Chinese cultural characteristics.
文章引用:茹怡珊, 张诗雪, 张倍佳, 绳慧 (2025). 群体认同测量与操纵方法的系统述评. 心理学进展, 15(11), 119-127. https://doi.org/10.12677/ap.2025.1511586

参考文献

[1] 艾传国, 佐斌(2011). 单类内隐联想测验(SC-IAT)在群体认同中的初步应用. 中国临床心理学杂志, 19(4), 476-478.
[2] 陈世平, 崔鑫(2015). 从社会认同理论视角看内外群体偏爱的发展. 理与行为研究, 13(3), 422-427.
[3] 池丽萍, 辛自强(2025). 我国社区认同研究10年回顾与前瞻. 心理科学进展, 33(8), 1443-1456.
[4] 邓洵, 龙思邑, 沈依琳, 赵欢欢, 贺雯, 等(2023). 共同内群体认同对医患竞争受害感的影响及其机制. 心理学报, 55(5), 752-765.
[5] 方子杰, 文宏伟, 周玉红, 高雪梅(2023). “人比人, 气死人”? 游戏玩家群体内与群体外社会比较的神经机制: 一项fMRI研究. 见 第二十五届全国心理学学术会议摘要集(pp. 442-443).
[6] 梁芳美, 肖子伦, 包燕, 赵玉芳(2020). 共同内群体认同对心理融合的促进效应及其机制. 心理科学, 43(5), 1147-1153.
[7] 梁芳美, 赵玉芳, 尹晨祖(2023). 共同内群体认同促进民族心理融合: 积极解释偏向的中介作用. 心理科学, 46(2), 386-393.
[8] 苗晓燕, 孙欣, 匡仪, 汪祚军(2021). 共患难,更同盟: 共同经历相同负性情绪事件促进合作行为. 理学报, 53(1), 81-94.
[9] 宋仕婕, 佐斌, 温芳芳, 谭潇(2020). 群体认同对群际敏感效应及其行为表现的影响. 心理学报, 52(8), 993-1003.
[10] 王沛, 韩彩霞, 丁川(2023). 共同内群体认同对群际威胁引发攻击行为的调节作用. 心理研究, 16(2), 153-160.
[11] 王晔安, 刘力, 刘霞(2021). 职业认同量表的修订及在中国护士群体中的应用. 中国心理卫生杂志, 35(4), 324-329.
[12] 熊猛(2015). 流动儿童相对剥夺感: 特点、影响因素与作用机制. 博士学位论文, 福州: 福建师范大学.
[13] 张若曦, 张乐敏(2025). 历史街区风貌保护的跨群体认同研究——基于VR眼动跟踪的场景感知. 新建筑, (4), 120-125.
[14] 张振, 齐春辉, 王洋, 赵辉, 王小新, 高晓雷(2020). 内群体偏爱或黑羊效应? 经济博弈中公平规范执行的群体偏见. 心理科学进展, 28(2), 329-339.
[15] 赵玉芳, 梁芳美(2019). 共同内群体认同促进民族心理融合: 双向度测量与SC-IAT检验. 西北师大学报(社会科学版), 56(3), 99-107.
[16] Breton, A., Ligneul, R., Jerbi, K., George, N., Baudouin, J., & Van der Henst, J. (2019). How Occupational Status Influences the Processing of Faces: An EEG Study. Neuropsychologia, 122, 125-135.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[17] Chiao, J. Y., Adams, R. B., Tse, P. U., Lowenthal, W. T., Richeson, J. A., & Ambady, N. (2008). Knowing Who’s Boss: fMRI and ERP Investigations of Social Dominance Perception. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 11, 201-214.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008). Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255-278.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] Hogg, M. A., & Turner, J. C. (1987). Intergroup Behaviour, Self-Stereotyping and the Salience of Social Categories. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 325-340.[CrossRef
[20] Li, Y., Wang, H., & Zhang, J. (2024). VR-Based Dynamic Measurement of Ethnic Identity: Neural and Behavioral Evidence. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 55, 189-205.
[21] Ma, R., Fink, E. L., & Atwell Seate, A. (2024). When My Group Is under Attack: The Development of a Social Identity Threat Scale. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 27, 738-758.[CrossRef
[22] Navarro-Lucena, F., Molinillo, S., & Anaya-Sánchez, R. (2025). Effect of Social Identification on Esports Viewers Behaviours. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 41, 9262-9273.[CrossRef
[23] Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An Integrative Theory of Inter Group Conflict. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33-48). Brooks/Cole.
[24] Van Swol, L. M., Ahn, P. H., Prahl, A., & Gong, Z. (2021). Language Use in Group Discourse and Its Relationship to Group Processes. Sage Open, 11, 1-17.[CrossRef
[25] Wang, Y., Wang, X., Song, Y., & Li, Y. (2023). The Effect of Temporal Focus on Implicit Space-Time Mapping in a Life History Strategy Framework. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55, 781-791.[CrossRef
[26] Xie, E., Zha, S., Xu, Y., & Li, X. (2025). Group Identification Drives Brain Integration for Collective Performance. eLife, 13, RP100000.[CrossRef
[27] Zhang, L., & Smith, J. (2024). Cross-Cultural Differences in Professional Identity: A Longitudinal Study of China and the US. Applied Psychology, 73, 56-78.