Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis 55455, USA.
Psychol Sci. 2013 Feb 1;24(2):197-205. doi: 10.1177/0956797612451471. Epub 2013 Jan 9.
Just as modern economies undergo periods of boom and bust, human ancestors experienced cycles of abundance and famine. Is the adaptive response when resources become scarce to save for the future or to spend money on immediate gains? Drawing on life-history theory, we propose that people's responses to resource scarcity depend on the harshness of their early-life environment, as reflected by childhood socioeconomic status (SES). In the three experiments reported here, we tested how people from different childhood environments responded to resource scarcity. We found that people who grew up in lower-SES environments were more impulsive, took more risks, and approached temptations more quickly. Conversely, people who grew up in higher-SES environments were less impulsive, took fewer risks, and approached temptations more slowly. Responses similarly diverged according to people's oxidative-stress levels-a urinary biomarker of cumulative stress exposure. Overall, whereas tendencies associated with early-life environments were dormant in benign conditions, they emerged under conditions of economic uncertainty.
就像现代经济经历繁荣和萧条周期一样，人类祖先也经历了丰饶和饥荒的循环。当资源变得稀缺时，是为未来储蓄还是为眼前利益花钱，这是一种适应性反应吗？本文利用生命史理论，提出人们对资源稀缺的反应取决于其早期生活环境的严酷程度，这反映在童年社会经济地位（SES）上。在我们在这里报告的三个实验中，我们测试了来自不同童年环境的人对资源稀缺的反应。我们发现，在较低 SES 环境中长大的人更冲动，承担更多风险，并且更快地接近诱惑。相反，在较高 SES 环境中长大的人则不那么冲动，承担的风险更小，并且更缓慢地接近诱惑。人们的氧化应激水平（一种累积压力暴露的尿生物标志物）也同样存在差异。总的来说，与早期生活环境相关的倾向在良性条件下处于休眠状态，但在经济不确定的情况下出现。
