• 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

从胶水到汽油:竞争如何使换位思考者变得不道德。

From glue to gasoline: how competition turns perspective takers unethical.

机构信息

1Ingeniería Comercial, Escuela de Negocios, Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez.

出版信息

Psychol Sci. 2013 Oct;24(10):1986-94. doi: 10.1177/0956797613482144. Epub 2013 Aug 16.

DOI:10.1177/0956797613482144
PMID:23955353
Abstract

Perspective taking is often the glue that binds people together. However, we propose that in competitive contexts, perspective taking is akin to adding gasoline to a fire: It inflames already-aroused competitive impulses and leads people to protect themselves from the potentially insidious actions of their competitors. Overall, we suggest that perspective taking functions as a relational amplifier. In cooperative contexts, it creates the foundation for prosocial impulses, but in competitive contexts, it triggers hypercompetition, leading people to prophylactically engage in unethical behavior to prevent themselves from being exploited. The experiments reported here establish that perspective taking interacts with the relational context--cooperative or competitive--to predict unethical behavior, from using insidious negotiation tactics to materially deceiving one's partner to cheating on an anagram task. In the context of competition, perspective taking can pervert the age-old axiom "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" into "do unto others as you think they will try to do unto you."

摘要

换位思考通常是将人们联系在一起的黏合剂。然而,我们认为,在竞争环境中,换位思考犹如往火上浇汽油:它会激起已经激起的竞争冲动,使人们保护自己免受竞争对手可能阴险的行为的影响。总的来说,我们认为换位思考是一种关系放大器。在合作环境中,它为亲社会冲动创造了基础,但在竞争环境中,它引发了过度竞争,导致人们预防性地采取不道德行为,以防止自己被利用。这里报告的实验表明,换位思考与合作或竞争的关系背景相互作用,预测不道德行为,从使用阴险的谈判策略到实质性地欺骗合作伙伴,再到在字谜任务上作弊。在竞争环境中,换位思考可以将古老的格言“己所不欲,勿施于人”扭曲为“以你认为别人会试图对你做的方式对待别人”。

相似文献

1
From glue to gasoline: how competition turns perspective takers unethical.从胶水到汽油:竞争如何使换位思考者变得不道德。
Psychol Sci. 2013 Oct;24(10):1986-94. doi: 10.1177/0956797613482144. Epub 2013 Aug 16.
2
When perspective taking increases taking: reactive egoism in social interaction.当观点采择增加时:社会互动中的反应性利己主义。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2006 Nov;91(5):872-89. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.872.
3
When to use your head and when to use your heart: the differential value of perspective-taking versus empathy in competitive interactions.何时用脑,何时用心:竞争互动中换位思考与同理心的差异价值。
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2013 Jan;39(1):3-16. doi: 10.1177/0146167212465320. Epub 2012 Nov 12.
4
Competitive children, cooperative mothers? Effect of various social factors on the retrospective and prospective use of theory of mind.竞争型儿童,合作型母亲?各种社会因素对心理理论回溯和前瞻使用的影响。
J Exp Child Psychol. 2020 Feb;190:104715. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2019.104715. Epub 2019 Nov 11.
5
Origins of human cooperation and morality.人类合作与道德的起源。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2013;64:231-55. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143812. Epub 2012 Jul 12.
6
Trust and social reciprocity in adolescence--a matter of perspective-taking.青少年时期的信任与社会互惠——换位思考的问题。
J Adolesc. 2014 Feb;37(2):175-84. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.11.011. Epub 2013 Dec 25.
7
Perceptions of morality and competence in (non)interdependent games.在(非)相互依存博弈中对道德和能力的认知
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2010 May;134(1):85-93. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.12.010. Epub 2010 Feb 1.
8
Distinct neural patterns of social cognition for cooperation versus competition.合作与竞争中社会认知的不同神经模式。
Neuroimage. 2016 Aug 15;137:86-96. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.04.069. Epub 2016 May 7.
9
What is moral about guilt? Acting "prosocially" at the disadvantage of others.内疚感有何道德可言?以牺牲他人为代价而“亲社会”地行事。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Mar;100(3):462-73. doi: 10.1037/a0021459.
10
"... As you would have them do unto you": Does imagining yourself in the other's place stimulate moral action?“……就像你希望别人对你做的那样”:设身处地为他人着想会激发道德行为吗?
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2003 Sep;29(9):1190-201. doi: 10.1177/0146167203254600.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparing the value of perceived human versus AI-generated empathy.比较人类感知的同理心与人工智能生成的同理心的价值。
Nat Hum Behav. 2025 Jun 30. doi: 10.1038/s41562-025-02247-w.
2
Competition increases the magnitude of dishonest reporting even when controlling for reward uncertainty.即使在控制奖励不确定性的情况下,竞争也会增加不诚实报告的程度。
Sci Rep. 2024 Dec 30;14(1):31980. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-83621-y.
3
When are people more open to cheating? Economic inequality makes people expect more everyday unethical behavior.什么时候人们更容易作弊?经济不平等使人们期望更多日常不道德的行为。
PLoS One. 2024 Feb 21;19(2):e0294124. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0294124. eCollection 2024.
4
Psychological constraint on unethical behavior in team-based competition.团队竞赛中不道德行为的心理约束
Front Psychol. 2023 Nov 14;14:1274414. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1274414. eCollection 2023.
5
Self- and Other-Orientation in High Rank: A Cultural Psychological Approach to Social Hierarchy.高阶层中的自我与他人取向:社会阶层的文化心理学方法。
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2024 Feb;28(1):54-80. doi: 10.1177/10888683231172252. Epub 2023 May 25.
6
The fear of conflict leads people to systematically avoid potentially valuable zero-sum situations.人们对冲突的恐惧导致他们系统地避免潜在有价值的零和情况。
Sci Rep. 2022 Oct 26;12(1):17944. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-22849-y.
7
People Cheat on Task Performance When They Feel Bored: The Mediating Role of State Self-Efficacy.当人们感到无聊时会在任务表现上作弊:状态自我效能感的中介作用。
Behav Sci (Basel). 2022 Oct 3;12(10):380. doi: 10.3390/bs12100380.
8
Disrupting the "empathy machine": The power and perils of virtual reality in addressing social issues.扰乱“共情机器”:虚拟现实在解决社会问题中的力量与风险。
Front Psychol. 2022 Sep 26;13:814565. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.814565. eCollection 2022.
9
Empathy and correct mental state inferences both promote prosociality.同理心和正确的心理状态推断都能促进亲社会行为。
Sci Rep. 2022 Oct 10;12(1):16979. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-20855-8.
10
Reliability of the empathy selection task, a novel behavioral measure of empathy avoidance.共情回避新型行为测量工具共情选择任务的可靠性。
Behav Res Methods. 2023 Aug;55(5):2638-2651. doi: 10.3758/s13428-022-01919-z. Epub 2022 Aug 22.