群际比较方向对群体成员调节定向的影响研究

发布时间：2018-06-05 11:17

本文选题：群际比较 + 上行比较　；参考：《西南大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：群际比较指个体根据自身的群体身份在自己和他人之间进行比较,或者从整体上将内群体与外群体进行比较。群际比较是一种普遍的社会现象,并且根据内外群体的地位差异可以区分出不同的比较方向。当内群体与某些方面表现较好的外群体进行比较时,就形成了上行群际比较。当内群体与某些方面表现较差的外群体进行比较时,就形成了下行群际比较。不同方向的群际比较会引发各种不同的心理反应。本研究关注群际比较方向对群体成员的调节定向的影响。调节定向理论区分了两种自我调节导向：促进定向和预防定向。促进定向源于个体的成长需求、愿望、理想,预防定向则与个体的安全需求、责任、义务有关,这两类定向的个体在策略使用、情绪体验等方面表现出完全不同的模式。以往研究发现,在地位定义维度,上行群际比较引起群体成员更高的血压、更谨慎的策略和更高的反应准确率,下行群际比较引起群体成员更低的血压、更急迫的策略和更高的反应速度。这些结果表明,在地位定义维度,上行群际比较激活了群体成员的预防定向,下行群际激活了促进定向。然而,当群际比较进入新领域时,群体成员的心理反应也发生转变。比如当群体地位等级变得不稳定时,高地位群体成员产生威胁相关的生理反应增强,他们努力实现维持型的目标,并采取谨慎策略；而低地位群体成员由原来的威胁相关生理反应转变为挑战相关生理反应,他们努力实现发展型目标,并采取迫切策略。从自我调节角度看,这是否意味着在地位不相关维度上,群际比较诱发了不同的调节定向呢?本研究试图对这一问题加以探讨。本研究假设在地位不相关维度上,群际比较会激活群体成员的调节定向,且上行比较激活促进定向,下行比较激活预防定向。研究者设计两个实验来证明该假设：实验一从策略角度证明群际比较方向会影响群体成员的调节定向,采用2(群际比较方向：上行vs.下行)×2(决策类型：促进型vs.预防型)的被试间研究设计。研究者以具体学校为群体单位,将排名较高的学校作为上行比较对象,排名较低的学校作为下行比较对象。另外,本实验采用调节匹配范式来测量调节定向。被试需要在完成群际比较任务之后,以不同策略选择并评价赠品。结果发现,群际比较方向与决策类型有显著的交互作用：在上行比较组,使用促进型策略的被试比使用预防型策略的被试对赠品估价更高；在下行比较组,两种策略使用者对赠品的估价没有差异。实验二从情绪角度证明群际比较方向会影响群体成员的调节定向,采用2(群际比较方向：上行vs.下行)×2(比较结果：成功vs.失败)的被试间研究设计。群际比较方向的操作方法与实验一相同。本实验使用虚假反馈方法来操作群际比较结果,并测量了比较结果对不同类型情绪(高兴-沮丧相关vs.放松-紧张相关)的影响。结果发现,群际比较方向与情绪类型存在显著交互作用：在上行比较组,促进型情绪的变化量明显大于预防型情绪；在下行比较组,促进型、预防型情绪的变化量没有差异。综合两个实验的结果得到以下结论：在地位不相关维度上,群际比较中的比较方向影响群体成员的调节定向。具体来讲,上行比较使群体成员产生明显的促进定向,而下行比较似乎并没有引起群体成员调节定向的差异。本研究说明个体水平之外群体水平的自我调节也是存在的,群体情境可以影响单个群体成员的调节定向。
[Abstract]:Group comparison refers to the comparison between individuals and others according to their own group identity, or the overall comparison of internal and external groups. Intergroup comparison is a common social phenomenon and can distinguish different directions according to the differences in the status of the internal and external groups. When the outside group is compared, the intergroup comparison is formed. When the internal group is compared with some other groups with poor performance, the intergroup comparison is formed. The intergroup comparison in different directions will lead to various psychological reactions. The theory of node orientation distinguishes two kinds of self-regulation orientation: promoting orientation and prevention orientation. Promoting orientation source to individual growth demand, desire, ideal, prevention orientation are related to individual security needs, responsibilities, obligations, and these two types of individuals show completely different patterns in the use of strategy, emotional experience and so on. It is found that, in the status definition dimension, the upper group comparison leads to higher blood pressure, more cautious strategy and higher response accuracy, and lower blood pressure, more urgent strategy and higher response speed. These results indicate that in the status definition dimension, the upper group is more active in group formation. However, the psychological responses of the members of the group also change when the group is compared to the new field. For example, when the group status grade becomes unstable, the threat related physiological responses of the high level group members are enhanced, and they strive to achieve the maintenance goal and take prudent policy. While the members of the low status group change from the original threat related physiological responses to the challenge related physiological responses, they strive to achieve the development goal and take urgent strategies. From the self regulation perspective, does this mean that the inter group comparison induces different adjustment orientations on the unrelated dimension of the status? This study tries to do this The problem is discussed.
This study assumes that on the unrelated dimension of status, the intergroup comparison activates the adjustment orientation of the group members, and the upward activation promotes the orientation, and the downlink activates the prevention orientation. The researchers have designed two experiments to prove the hypothesis:
Experiment one proves that the inter group direction will affect the adjustment and orientation of the group members from the strategic point of view, and uses the 2 (inter group comparison direction: uplink vs. downlink) x 2 (decision type: the promotion type vs. prevention type) in the intertrial design. The researchers take the specific school as the group unit, the ranking higher school as the upper comparison object, the lower rank is lower. In addition, the experiment uses the regulation matching paradigm to measure the adjustment orientation. The subjects need to choose and evaluate the gifts with different strategies after the group comparison task. The results show that the intergroup comparison direction has a significant interaction with the decision type: in the upper comparison group, the use of the promotion strategy is used. Compared with the preventive strategies, the evaluation of the gifts was higher; in the downlink comparison group, there was no difference between the two strategies users in valuing the gifts.
Experiment two proves that the inter group comparison direction affects the adjustment and orientation of the group members, and uses 2 (inter group comparison direction: uplink vs. downlink) x 2 (comparative results: successful vs. failure). The intergroup comparison direction is the same as the experiment one. This experiment uses false feedback to operate the intergroup comparison The effects of the comparative results on different types of mood (vs. relaxation stress correlation) were measured. The results showed that there was a significant interaction between the intergroup comparative direction and the emotional type: in the upper group, the amount of promoting emotion was significantly greater than that of the prophylactic mood; in the descending comparison group, the promoting, prophylactic mood was in the downward comparison group. There is no difference in the amount of change.
The results of the two experiments are concluded as follows: in the unrelated status dimension, the comparative direction in the intergroup comparison affects the adjustment and orientation of the group members. In particular, the uplink comparison makes the group members significantly promote orientation, while the downlink comparison does not seem to cause the difference in the orientation of the group members. Group level self-regulation also exists outside the level. Group context can affect the Regulation Orientation of individual group members.
【学位授予单位】：西南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：C912.6

【参考文献】