• 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

战争还是和平?大国相互依存的主观认知如何塑造先发制人的防御性攻击。

War or Peace? How the Subjective Perception of Great Power Interdependence Shapes Preemptive Defensive Aggression.

作者信息

Jing Yiming, Gries Peter H, Li Yang, Stivers Adam W, Mifune Nobuhiro, Kuhlman D M, Bai Liying

机构信息

Institute for US-China Issues, University of Oklahoma, NormanOK, United States.

Brain Science Institute, Tamagawa UniversityMachida, Japan.

出版信息

Front Psychol. 2017 Jun 2;8:864. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00864. eCollection 2017.

DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00864
PMID:28626433
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5455139/
Abstract

Why do great powers with benign intentions end up fighting each other in wars they do not seek? We utilize an incentivized, two-person "Preemptive Strike Game" (PSG) to explore how the subjective perception of great power interdependence shapes defensive aggression against persons from rival great powers. In Study 1, college students from the United States ( = 115), China ( = 106), and Japan ( = 99) made PSG decisions facing each other. This natural experiment revealed that Chinese and Japanese participants (a) made more preemptive attacks against each other and Americans than against their compatriots, and that (b) greater preexisting perceptions of bilateral competition increased intergroup attack rates. In Study 2, adult Americans ( = 127) watched real CNN expert interviews portraying United States-China economic interdependence as more positive or negative. This randomized experiment revealed that the more positive portrayal reduced preemptive American strikes against Chinese (but not Japanese), while the more negative portrayal amplified American anger about China's rise, increasing preemptive attacks against Chinese. We also found, however, that preemptive strikes were primarily defensive and not offensive. Interventions to reduce defensive aggression and promote great power peace are discussed.

摘要

为何怀有善意的大国最终会在它们并不寻求的战争中相互争斗?我们运用一个有激励机制的两人“先发制人打击博弈”(PSG)来探究大国相互依存的主观认知如何塑造针对敌对大国人员的防御性攻击。在研究1中,来自美国( = 115)、中国( = 106)和日本( = 99)的大学生相互面对做出PSG决策。这个自然实验表明,中国和日本参与者(a)对彼此以及美国人发动的先发制人攻击比对本国同胞更多,并且(b)双边竞争的既有认知越强,群体间攻击率越高。在研究2中,成年美国人( = 127)观看了真实的美国有线电视新闻网(CNN)专家访谈,这些访谈将美中经济相互依存描绘得更积极或更消极。这个随机实验表明,更积极的描绘减少了美国人对中国人(而非日本人)的先发制人打击,而更消极的描绘加剧了美国人对中国崛起的愤怒,增加了对中国人的先发制人攻击。然而,我们也发现先发制人打击主要是防御性的而非进攻性的。文中还讨论了减少防御性攻击及促进大国和平的干预措施。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/38e8/5455139/eb57ef357769/fpsyg-08-00864-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/38e8/5455139/a46e36ce56f5/fpsyg-08-00864-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/38e8/5455139/2e2211c935a1/fpsyg-08-00864-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/38e8/5455139/43663ebade25/fpsyg-08-00864-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/38e8/5455139/8ffb4707c4d2/fpsyg-08-00864-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/38e8/5455139/eb57ef357769/fpsyg-08-00864-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/38e8/5455139/a46e36ce56f5/fpsyg-08-00864-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/38e8/5455139/2e2211c935a1/fpsyg-08-00864-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/38e8/5455139/43663ebade25/fpsyg-08-00864-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/38e8/5455139/8ffb4707c4d2/fpsyg-08-00864-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/38e8/5455139/eb57ef357769/fpsyg-08-00864-g005.jpg

相似文献

1
War or Peace? How the Subjective Perception of Great Power Interdependence Shapes Preemptive Defensive Aggression.战争还是和平?大国相互依存的主观认知如何塑造先发制人的防御性攻击。
Front Psychol. 2017 Jun 2;8:864. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00864. eCollection 2017.
2
Preemptive strikes: Fear, hope, and defensive aggression.先发制人:恐惧、希望与防御性攻击。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2017 Feb;112(2):224-237. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000077. Epub 2016 Sep 29.
3
Vasopressin enhances human preemptive strike in both males and females.加压素增强了男性和女性的人类先发制人攻击行为。
Sci Rep. 2019 Jul 4;9(1):9664. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-45953-y.
4
Conjecturing Harmful Intent and Preemptive Strike in Paranoia.偏执狂中的有害意图猜测与先发制人打击
Front Psychol. 2021 Sep 8;12:726081. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.726081. eCollection 2021.
5
Intergroup Biases in Fear-induced Aggression.恐惧诱发攻击中的群体间偏见。
Front Psychol. 2017 Jan 24;8:49. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00049. eCollection 2017.
6
Preemptive Striking in Individual and Group Conflict.个体与群体冲突中的先发制人打击。
PLoS One. 2016 May 5;11(5):e0154859. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154859. eCollection 2016.
7
Fear can promote competition, defensive aggression, and dominance complementarity.恐惧会促进竞争、防御性攻击和支配互补性。
Behav Brain Sci. 2023 May 8;46:e63. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X22001935.
8
[The role of collective victimhood in intergroup aggression: Japan-China relations].[集体受害感在群体间攻击行为中的作用:日中关系]
Shinrigaku Kenkyu. 2012 Dec;83(5):489-95. doi: 10.4992/jjpsy.83.489.
9
Spoils division rules shape aggression between natural groups.战利品分配规则塑造了自然群体之间的攻击性。
Nat Hum Behav. 2018 May;2(5):322-326. doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0338-z. Epub 2018 Apr 16.
10
Foreign Policy through Other Means: Hard Power, Soft Power, and China's Turn to Political Warfare to Influence the United States.《以其他手段推行的外交政策:硬实力、软实力与中国转向政治战以影响美国》
Orbis. 2020;64(2):174-206. doi: 10.1016/j.orbis.2020.02.004. Epub 2020 Mar 4.

引用本文的文献

1
The nasty neighbor effect in humans.人类中的讨厌邻居效应。
Sci Adv. 2024 Jun 28;10(26):eadm7968. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adm7968. Epub 2024 Jun 26.
2
Conjecturing Harmful Intent and Preemptive Strike in Paranoia.偏执狂中的有害意图猜测与先发制人打击
Front Psychol. 2021 Sep 8;12:726081. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.726081. eCollection 2021.
3
Vasopressin enhances human preemptive strike in both males and females.加压素增强了男性和女性的人类先发制人攻击行为。

本文引用的文献

1
Intergroup Biases in Fear-induced Aggression.恐惧诱发攻击中的群体间偏见。
Front Psychol. 2017 Jan 24;8:49. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00049. eCollection 2017.
2
Preemptive strikes: Fear, hope, and defensive aggression.先发制人:恐惧、希望与防御性攻击。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2017 Feb;112(2):224-237. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000077. Epub 2016 Sep 29.
3
In-group defense, out-group aggression, and coordination failures in intergroup conflict.群体内防御、群体间攻击以及群体间冲突中的协调失败。
Sci Rep. 2019 Jul 4;9(1):9664. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-45953-y.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Sep 20;113(38):10524-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1605115113. Epub 2016 Sep 6.
4
Asymmetries in altruistic behavior during violent intergroup conflict.暴力群体间冲突中利他行为的不对称性。
Evol Psychol. 2013 Oct 23;11(5):973-93. doi: 10.1177/147470491301100504.
5
Trust, conflict, and cooperation: a meta-analysis.信任、冲突与合作:一项元分析。
Psychol Bull. 2013 Sep;139(5):1090-112. doi: 10.1037/a0030939. Epub 2012 Dec 10.
6
Mind games: the mental representation of conflict.思维游戏:冲突的心理表现。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2012 Jan;102(1):132-48. doi: 10.1037/a0025389. Epub 2011 Sep 12.
7
The weirdest people in the world?世界上最奇怪的人?
Behav Brain Sci. 2010 Jun;33(2-3):61-83; discussion 83-135. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X0999152X. Epub 2010 Jun 15.
8
Universal dimensions of social cognition: warmth and competence.社会认知的普遍维度:热情与能力。
Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Feb;11(2):77-83. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005. Epub 2006 Dec 22.
9
Perceiving intergroup conflict: from game models to mental templates.感知群体间冲突:从博弈模型到心理模板
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2006 Dec;32(12):1674-89. doi: 10.1177/0146167206291947.
10
Different emotional reactions to different groups: a sociofunctional threat-based approach to "prejudice".对不同群体的不同情绪反应:一种基于社会功能威胁的“偏见”研究方法。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005 May;88(5):770-89. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.5.770.