School of Psychology, Shandong Normal University, Jinan, China.
Department of Statistics, University of Connecticut, Mansfield, USA.
BMC Psychiatry. 2021 Jan 5;21(1):3. doi: 10.1186/s12888-020-02928-y.
Based on social comparison theory, two experiments were conducted to explore the effects of depression and social comparison on adolescents, using the ultimatum game (UG).
Before the formal experiment began, a preliminary experiment tested the effectiveness of social comparison settings. This study used the UG paradigm to explore adolescents' social decision-making in the context of gain and loss through two experiments. These experiments were designed as a 2 (group: depressive mood group, normal mood group) × 2 (social comparison: upward, downward) × 3 (fairness level: fair 5:5, unfair 3:7, extremely unfair 1:9) three-factor hybrid study.
(1) The fairer the proposal was, the higher the sense of fairness participants felt, and the higher their acceptance rate. (2) The acceptance rate of the participants for downward social comparison was significantly higher than that for upward social comparison, but there was no difference in fairness perception between the two social comparisons. (3) Under the context of gain, the acceptance rate of the depressive mood group was higher than that of the normal mood group, but there was no difference in the acceptance rate between the depressive mood group and the normal mood group under the loss context. Depressive mood participants had more feelings of unfairness in the contexts of both gain and loss. (4) The effects of depressive mood, social comparison and the fairness level of distribution on social decision-making interact.
The interaction of social comparison, depressive mood and proposal type demonstrates that besides one's emotion, cognitive biases and social factors can also have an effect on social decision-making. These findings indicate that behavioral decision boosting may provide an avenue for appropriate interventions in helping to guide adolescents to make social decisions.
基于社会比较理论，本研究通过两个使用最后通牒博弈（UG）的实验，探讨了抑郁和社会比较对青少年的影响。
在正式实验开始之前，一项初步实验测试了社会比较设置的有效性。本研究使用 UG 范式，通过两个实验探讨了青少年在得失情境下的社会决策。这两个实验设计为 2（组：抑郁情绪组，正常情绪组）×2（社会比较：向上比较，向下比较）×3（公平水平：公平 5:5，不公平 3:7，极不公平 1:9）三因素混合研究。
（1）提议越公平，参与者的公平感越强，接受率越高。（2）与向上比较相比，向下比较的参与者接受率显著更高，但两种社会比较之间的公平感知没有差异。（3）在收益情境下，抑郁情绪组的接受率高于正常情绪组，但在损失情境下，抑郁情绪组和正常情绪组的接受率没有差异。抑郁情绪组在收益和损失两种情境下都有更多的不公平感。（4）抑郁情绪、社会比较和分配公平水平对社会决策的影响存在交互作用。
社会比较、抑郁情绪和提议类型的相互作用表明，除了情绪之外，认知偏差和社会因素也会对社会决策产生影响。这些发现表明，行为决策增强可能为帮助指导青少年做出社会决策的适当干预提供途径。
