...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of personality and social psychology >The Psychosemantics of Free Riding: Dissecting the Architecture of a Moral Concept
【24h】

The Psychosemantics of Free Riding: Dissecting the Architecture of a Moral Concept

机译：搭便车的心理主义：剖析道德观念的架构

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

For collective action to evolve and be maintained by selection, the mind must be equipped with mechanisms designed to identify free riders-individuals who do not contribute to a collective project but still benefit from it. Once identified, free riders must be either punished or excluded from future collective actions. But what criteria does the mind use to categorize someone as a free rider? An evolutionary analysis suggests that failure to contribute is not sufficient. Failure to contribute can occur by intention or accident, but the adaptive threat is posed by those who are motivated to benefit themselves at the expense of cooperators. In 6 experiments, we show that only individuals with exploitive intentions were categorized as free riders, even when holding their actual level of contribution constant (Studies 1 and 2). In contrast to an evolutionary model, rational choice and reinforcement theory suggest that different contribution levels (leading to different payoffs for their cooperative partners) should be key. When intentions were held constant, however, differences in contribution level were not used to categorize individuals as free riders, although some categorization occurred along a competence dimension (Study 3). Free rider categorization was not due to general tendencies to categorize (Study 4) or to mechanisms that track a broader class of intentional moral violations (Studies 5A and 5B). The results reveal the operation of an evolved concept with features tailored for solving the collective action problems faced by ancestral hunter-gatherers.
机译：为了使集体行动得以发展并通过选择维持，头脑必须配备旨在识别自由骑手的机制，即那些对集体项目无贡献但仍从中受益的个人。一旦确定，搭便车者必须受到惩罚或被排除在未来的集体行动之外。但是，头脑使用什么标准将某人归类为“搭便车”？进化分析表明，没有贡献是不够的。做出贡献的失败可能是出于意向或意外，但是适应性威胁是由那些愿意以牺牲合作者为代价使自己受益的人造成的。在6个实验中，我们表明，即使在保持其实际贡献水平不变的情况下，只有具有剥削意图的个人才被归类为搭便车者（研究1和2）。与进化模型相反，理性选择和强化理论表明，不同的贡献水平（导致其合作伙伴获得不同的回报）应该是关键。然而，当意图保持不变时，尽管沿能力维度进行了一些分类，但并未使用贡献水平的差异将个人归类为搭便车者（研究3）。搭便车的归类不是归因于归类的总体趋势（研究4），还是归因于追踪更广泛的故意道德违法行为的机制（研究5A和5B）。结果揭示了一个经过发展的概念的运作，该概念具有专为解决祖先狩猎采集者所面临的集体行动问题而量身定制的功能。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号