Department of Cognitive, Linguistic, and Psychological Sciences, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition, and Behavior, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Sci Rep. 2020 Oct 23;10(1):18164. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-74818-y.
Evolutionary models show that human cooperation can arise through direct reciprocity relationships. However, it remains unclear which psychological mechanisms proximally motivate individuals to reciprocate. Recent evidence suggests that the psychological motives for choosing to reciprocate trust differ between individuals, which raises the question whether these differences have a stable distribution in a population or are rather an artifact of the experimental task. Here, we combine data from three independent trust game studies to find that the relative prevalence of different reciprocity motives is highly stable across participant samples. Furthermore, the distribution of motives is relatively unaffected by changes to the salient features of the experimental paradigm. Finally, the motive classification assigned by our computational modeling analysis corresponds to the participants' own subjective experience of their psychological decision process, and no existing models of social preference can account for the observed individual differences in reciprocity motives. These findings support the view that reciprocal decision-making is not just regulated by individual differences in 'pro-social' versus 'pro-self' tendencies, but also by trait-like differences across several alternative pro-social motives, whose distribution in a population is stable.
进化模型表明,人类合作可以通过直接互惠关系产生。然而,目前尚不清楚哪些心理机制促使个体进行互惠。最近的证据表明,个体选择信任互惠的心理动机存在差异,这就提出了一个问题,即这些差异在人群中是否具有稳定的分布,或者它们是否只是实验任务的一个特征。在这里,我们结合了三个独立的信任博弈研究的数据,发现不同互惠动机的相对流行度在参与者样本之间具有高度的稳定性。此外,动机的分布相对不受实验范式显著特征变化的影响。最后,我们的计算建模分析分配的动机分类与参与者自身对心理决策过程的主观体验相对应,并且现有的社会偏好模型无法解释观察到的互惠动机的个体差异。这些发现支持这样一种观点,即互惠决策不仅受到“亲社会”与“自利”倾向的个体差异的调节,还受到几种替代亲社会动机的特质差异的调节,而这些动机在人群中的分布是稳定的。