• 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

重要的是接受方:把钱花在牢固的社会关系上比花在薄弱的社会关系上会带来更大的幸福感。

It's the recipient that counts: spending money on strong social ties leads to greater happiness than spending on weak social ties.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2011 Feb 10;6(2):e17018. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017018.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0017018
PMID:21347326
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3037397/
Abstract

Previous research has shown that spending money on others (prosocial spending) increases happiness. But, do the happiness gains depend on who the money is spent on? Sociologists have distinguished between strong ties with close friends and family and weak ties--relationships characterized by less frequent contact, lower emotional intensity, and limited intimacy. We randomly assigned participants to reflect on a time when they spent money on either a strong social tie or a weak social tie. Participants reported higher levels of positive affect after recalling a time they spent on a strong tie versus a weak tie. The level of intimacy in the relationship was more important than the type of relationship; there was no significant difference in positive affect after recalling spending money on a family member instead of a friend. These results add to the growing literature examining the factors that moderate the link between prosocial behaviour and happiness.

摘要

先前的研究表明,为他人花钱(亲社会支出)会增加幸福感。但是,幸福感的提升是否取决于花钱的对象?社会学家将与亲密朋友和家人的强关系与弱关系(关系的特点是接触频率较低、情感强度较低且亲密程度有限)区分开来。我们随机分配参与者,让他们回想自己曾经把钱花在强关系还是弱关系上。与回想自己把钱花在弱关系上相比,参与者在回忆自己把钱花在强关系上时,报告的积极情绪水平更高。关系的亲密程度比关系的类型更重要;回忆起花钱给家人而不是朋友时,积极情绪没有显著差异。这些结果增加了越来越多的研究文献,这些文献考察了调节亲社会行为与幸福感之间关系的因素。

相似文献

1
It's the recipient that counts: spending money on strong social ties leads to greater happiness than spending on weak social ties.重要的是接受方:把钱花在牢固的社会关系上比花在薄弱的社会关系上会带来更大的幸福感。
PLoS One. 2011 Feb 10;6(2):e17018. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017018.
2
Does spending money on others promote happiness?: A registered replication report.花钱在他人身上能否提升幸福感?一项注册的复制报告。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2020 Aug;119(2):e15-e26. doi: 10.1037/pspa0000191. Epub 2020 Apr 6.
3
Are the benefits of prosocial spending and buying time moderated by age, gender, or income?亲社会支出和购买时间的好处是否受到年龄、性别或收入的调节?
PLoS One. 2022 Jun 9;17(6):e0269636. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269636. eCollection 2022.
4
Spending money on others promotes happiness.把钱花在别人身上能增进幸福感。
Science. 2008 Mar 21;319(5870):1687-8. doi: 10.1126/science.1150952.
5
Money Buys Happiness When Spending Fits Our Personality.当支出符合我们的个性时,钱能买到幸福。
Psychol Sci. 2016 May;27(5):715-25. doi: 10.1177/0956797616635200. Epub 2016 Apr 7.
6
Prosocial spending and well-being: cross-cultural evidence for a psychological universal.亲社会支出与幸福感:心理普遍性的跨文化证据。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013 Apr;104(4):635-52. doi: 10.1037/a0031578. Epub 2013 Feb 18.
7
Prosocial spending encourages happiness: A replication of the only experiment reported in Dunn, Aknin, and Norton (2008).亲社会支出能促进幸福感:对邓恩、阿克宁和诺顿(2008 年)唯一报告的实验的复制。
PLoS One. 2022 Sep 7;17(9):e0272434. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272434. eCollection 2022.
8
For Whom Money Matters Less: Social Connectedness as a Resilience Resource in the UK.对谁来说金钱不那么重要:社会联系作为英国的一种复原力资源
Soc Indic Res. 2016;125(2):509-535. doi: 10.1007/s11205-014-0858-5. Epub 2015 Jan 6.
9
To do, to have, or to share? Valuing experiences over material possessions depends on the involvement of others.做、拥有还是分享?将体验的价值置于物质财富之上取决于他人的参与。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013 Feb;104(2):199-215. doi: 10.1037/a0030953. Epub 2012 Dec 31.
10
Social Interactions and Well-Being: The Surprising Power of Weak Ties.社交互动与幸福感:弱关系的惊人力量。
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2014 Jul;40(7):910-922. doi: 10.1177/0146167214529799. Epub 2014 Apr 25.

引用本文的文献

1
Impact of Empathic Concern on Prosocial Behavior in Gain and Loss Contexts: Evidence from Event-Related Potential.共情关注对得失情境下亲社会行为的影响:来自事件相关电位的证据
Brain Sci. 2024 Apr 19;14(4):400. doi: 10.3390/brainsci14040400.
2
Help others-be happy? The effect of altruistic behavior on happiness across cultures.帮助他人——会感到幸福吗?利他行为对不同文化背景下幸福感的影响。
Front Psychol. 2023 Jun 23;14:1156661. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1156661. eCollection 2023.
3
Beyond prosociality: Recalling many types of moral behavior produces positive emotion.超越亲社会行为:回忆多种类型的道德行为会产生积极的情绪。
PLoS One. 2022 Nov 11;17(11):e0277488. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277488. eCollection 2022.
4
Are the benefits of prosocial spending and buying time moderated by age, gender, or income?亲社会支出和购买时间的好处是否受到年龄、性别或收入的调节?
PLoS One. 2022 Jun 9;17(6):e0269636. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269636. eCollection 2022.
5
Gratitude Affects Inter-Subjective Synchronicity for Cognitive Performance and Autonomic Responsiveness.感恩会影响认知表现和自主反应的主体间同步性。
Front Psychol. 2021 Feb 24;12:574983. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.574983. eCollection 2021.
6
Subjective Happiness Among Polish and Hadza People.波兰人和哈扎人的主观幸福感
Front Psychol. 2020 Jun 9;11:1173. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01173. eCollection 2020.
7
Flourishing and prosocial behaviors: A multilevel investigation of national corruption level as a moderator.繁荣与亲社会行为:国家腐败水平作为调节变量的多层次研究。
PLoS One. 2018 Jul 12;13(7):e0200062. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0200062. eCollection 2018.
8
Motivation Counts: Autonomous But Not Obligated Sharing Promotes Happiness in Preschoolers.动机很重要:自主而非被迫分享能提升学龄前儿童的幸福感。
Front Psychol. 2017 May 31;8:867. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00867. eCollection 2017.
9
When is giving an impulse? An ERP investigation of intuitive prosocial behavior.给予冲动是在何时?对直观亲社会行为的一项事件相关电位研究。
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2016 Jul;11(7):1121-9. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsv077. Epub 2015 Jun 17.
10
Patterns and predictors of antidepressant use in ambulatory cancer patients with common solid tumors.常见实体瘤门诊癌症患者使用抗抑郁药的模式及预测因素。
Psychooncology. 2015 May;24(5):523-32. doi: 10.1002/pon.3606. Epub 2014 Jun 14.

本文引用的文献

1
Emotions as infectious diseases in a large social network: the SISa model.情绪在大型社交网络中的传播:SISa 模型。
Proc Biol Sci. 2010 Dec 22;277(1701):3827-35. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.1217. Epub 2010 Jul 7.
2
On the costs of self-interested economic behavior: how does stinginess get under the skin?自利经济行为的代价:吝啬是如何影响人的?
J Health Psychol. 2010 May;15(4):627-33. doi: 10.1177/1359105309356366.
3
Dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network: longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the Framingham Heart Study.幸福在大型社交网络中的动态传播:弗雷明汉心脏研究20年纵向分析
BMJ. 2008 Dec 4;337:a2338. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a2338.
4
Spending money on others promotes happiness.把钱花在别人身上能增进幸福感。
Science. 2008 Mar 21;319(5870):1687-8. doi: 10.1126/science.1150952.
5
The benefits of frequent positive affect: does happiness lead to success?频繁产生积极情绪的益处:幸福会带来成功吗?
Psychol Bull. 2005 Nov;131(6):803-55. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.131.6.803.
6
To do or to have? That is the question.做还是拥有?这就是问题所在。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Dec;85(6):1193-202. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.6.1193.
7
Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales.积极和消极情绪简短测量方法的编制与验证:PANAS量表
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988 Jun;54(6):1063-70. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063.