• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

忠诚的偏差:检验群体异议的规范冲突模型。

Loyal deviance: testing the normative conflict model of dissent in social groups.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA 18015, USA.

出版信息

Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2010 Jan;36(1):5-18. doi: 10.1177/0146167209350628. Epub 2009 Nov 11.

DOI:10.1177/0146167209350628
PMID:19907038
Abstract

The normative conflict model predicts that expressions of dissent within groups can be motivated by the collective interest and that strongly identified members may dissent from group norms if and when they are perceived to be harmful to the collective. We present convergent evidence from four studies in support of the model. Study 1 investigated retrospective reports of disagreements and found that strongly identified members reported collectively oriented motives for expressing disagreement within their groups. Studies 2a and 2b provided experimental tests of the prediction that strongly identified group members are willing to dissent when they reflect on how a norm could harm their group but not when they reflect on negative individualistic consequences of the same norm. Finally, Study 3 replicated these effects using a correlational design that measured actual opinion expression in an ostensible online chat room.

摘要

规范冲突模型预测,群体内部的异议表达可能是出于集体利益,而强烈认同群体的成员如果认为群体规范有害,可能会反对这些规范。我们通过四项研究提供了一致的证据来支持该模型。研究 1 调查了对分歧的回顾性报告,发现强烈认同的成员报告了在群体内部表达分歧的集体导向动机。研究 2a 和 2b 提供了实验检验,预测强烈认同的群体成员在反思规范如何伤害他们的群体时愿意表示反对,但在反思同一规范对个人的负面影响时则不会。最后,研究 3 使用相关设计复制了这些效果,该设计在一个看似在线聊天室中测量了实际的意见表达。

相似文献

1
Loyal deviance: testing the normative conflict model of dissent in social groups.忠诚的偏差:检验群体异议的规范冲突模型。
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2010 Jan;36(1):5-18. doi: 10.1177/0146167209350628. Epub 2009 Nov 11.
2
Energizing and de-motivating effects of norm-conflict.规范冲突的激励和去激励效应。
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2013 Jan;39(1):57-72. doi: 10.1177/0146167212464234. Epub 2012 Oct 25.
3
On being both with us and against us: a normative conflict model of dissent in social groups.既与我们同在又与我们作对:社会群体中异议的规范冲突模型。
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2008 Feb;12(1):50-72. doi: 10.1177/1088868307309606. Epub 2007 Dec 17.
4
Pronorm and antinorm deviants: a test of the subjective group dynamics model.正向规范和反向规范偏差:主观群体动力学模型的一项测试
J Soc Psychol. 2008 Oct;148(5):641-4. doi: 10.3200/SOCP.148.5.641-644.
5
Deviance as adherence to injunctive group norms: the overlooked role of social identification in deviance.偏离作为对强制性群体规范的遵守:社会认同在偏离中的被忽视作用。
Br J Soc Psychol. 2010 Dec;49(Pt 4):827-47. doi: 10.1348/014466609X481416. Epub 2010 Feb 12.
6
Avoiding groupthink: whereas weakly identified members remain silent, strongly identified members dissent about collective problems.避免群体思维:当认同感较弱的成员保持沉默时,认同感较强的成员会对集体问题提出异议。
Psychol Sci. 2009 May;20(5):546-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02333.x. Epub 2009 Apr 6.
7
Working for the self or working for the group: how self- versus group affirmation affects collective behavior in low-status groups.为自己工作还是为群体工作:自我肯定与群体肯定如何影响低地位群体中的集体行为。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2009 Jan;96(1):183-202. doi: 10.1037/a0013068.
8
Explaining radical group behavior: Developing emotion and efficacy routes to normative and nonnormative collective action.解释激进团体行为:发展情感和效能途径,以实现规范和非规范的集体行动。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Jul;101(1):129-48. doi: 10.1037/a0022728.
9
Deviance and dissent in groups.群体中的偏差与异见。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2014;65:461-85. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115151. Epub 2013 Jun 7.
10
Distinguishing between silent and vocal minorities: not all deviants feel marginal.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2008 May;94(5):871-82. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.5.871.

引用本文的文献

1
Voices of Loyal Members: Dual Role of Organizational Identification in the Process of Employee Voice.忠诚成员之声:组织认同在员工建言过程中的双重作用。
Behav Sci (Basel). 2025 Jan 22;15(2):109. doi: 10.3390/bs15020109.
2
Reinforcement learning of altruistic punishment differs between cultures and across the lifespan.亲社会惩罚的强化学习在不同文化和整个生命周期中存在差异。
PLoS Comput Biol. 2024 Jul 11;20(7):e1012274. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012274. eCollection 2024 Jul.
3
Understanding individual and collective response to climate change: The role of a self-other mismatch.
理解个体和集体对气候变化的反应:自我与他人认知不匹配的作用。
Front Psychol. 2022 Sep 29;13:935209. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.935209. eCollection 2022.
4
From Threat to Challenge: Understanding the Impact of Historical Collective Trauma on Contemporary Intergroup Conflict.从威胁到挑战:理解历史集体创伤对当代群体间冲突的影响。
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2023 Jan;18(1):190-209. doi: 10.1177/17456916221094540. Epub 2022 Aug 9.
5
The double-edged sword effect of ethical leadership on constructive deviance: An integrated model of two approaches based on organizational identification and normative conflict.道德领导对建设性越轨行为的双刃剑效应:基于组织认同和规范冲突的两种方法的整合模型。
Front Psychol. 2022 Jul 19;13:892395. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.892395. eCollection 2022.
6
Emotional reactions to deviance in groups: the relation between number of angry reactions, felt rejection, and conformity.群体中对越轨行为的情绪反应:愤怒反应数量、感受到的排斥与从众之间的关系。
Front Psychol. 2015 Jun 15;6:830. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00830. eCollection 2015.
7
Contesting the "Nature" Of Conformity: what Milgram and Zimbardo's studies really show.挑战“从众”的本质:米尔格拉姆和津巴多的研究真正揭示了什么。
PLoS Biol. 2012;10(11):e1001426. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001426. Epub 2012 Nov 20.