亲社会行为的概念表征及其方法述评

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2024.02.17

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本研究基于概念表征的经典和原型两种理论,分别探讨“以研究者为中心”和“以被试为中心”的亲社会行为概念表征方式及其方法:基于经典理论的亲社会行为概念表征往往局限于利他性特征,忽略了被试群体特异性造成的理解差异,按照成分分析法对其进行意义分解存在主观性、片面性和适用度不高等局限;基于原型理论的亲社会行为概念表征通过自由列举—原型分析—重复验证的程序,从被试自身认知出发,关注被试的特征,突破了传统亲社会行为的概念范畴,但该结构的稳定性和适用性仍存疑虑。通过两者的对比分析,本研究结合两种理论,提出从群体特异性和情境特异性视角丰富亲社会行为的概念结构,进一步整合与完善亲社会行为概念表征的理论模型。

关键词: 亲社会行为, 概念表征, 经典理论, 原型理论

Abstract: Based on the classical and prototype theories of conceptual representation, this paper discusses the representation ways and methods of prosocial behavior concepts of “researcher-centered” and “subject-centered” respectively. The conceptual representation of prosocial behavior based on classical theory is often limited to altruistic characteristics, ignoring the differences in understanding caused by the specificity of the subjects, and decomposing its meaning according to component analysis, which has some limitations such as subjectivity, one-sidedness and low applicability. According to prototype theory, the conceptual representation of prosocial behavior breaks through the traditional concept category of prosocial behavior through the process of free enumeration-prototype analysis-repeated verification, starting from the subjects' own cognition and paying attention to the subjects’ characteristics. However, there are still doubts about the stability and applicability of this structure. Through the comparative analysis of the two theories, this paper proposes to enrich the conceptual structure of prosocial behavior from the perspective of group specificity and situation specificity, and further, integrate and improve the theoretical model of the conceptual representation of prosocial behavior.

Key words: prosocial behavior, conceptual representation, classical theory, prototype theory

中图分类号:

B844

章洁敏, 陶云, 杨舒涵, 陈睿. 亲社会行为的概念表征及其方法述评[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(2): 298-304.

ZHANG Jiemin, TAO Yun, YANG Shuhan, CHEN Rui. A Review on Conceptual Representation and Its Methods of Prosocial Behavior[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2024, 40(2): 298-304.

参考文献

Battig, W. F., & Montague, W. E. (1969). Category norms for verbal items in 56 categories.Journal of Child Language, 6, 29-52.
Bergin, C., Bergin, D. A., & French, E. (1995). Preschoolers' prosocial repertoires:Parents' perspectives. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 10(1), 81-103.
Bergin, C., Talley, S., & Hamer, L. (2003). Prosocial behaviors of young adolescents:A focus group study. Journal of Adolescence, 26(1), 13-32.
Boxer, P., Tisak, M. S., & Goldstein, S. E. (2004). Is it bad to be good? An exploration of aggressive and prosocial behavior subtypes in adolescence. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 33(2), 91-100.
Carlo, G., & Randall, B. A. (2002). The development of a measure of prosocial behaviors for late adolescents. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 31(1), 31-44.
Carlo, G. (2014) The development and correlates of prosocial moral behaviors. In M. Killen, & J. G. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook of Moral Development. New York, NY:Psychology Press.
Ding, W., Shao, Y., Sun, B., Xie, R., Li, W., & Wang, X. (2018). How can prosocial behavior be motivated? The different roles of moral judgment, moral elevation, and moral identity among the young Chinese. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 814. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00814
Ding, P. (2021). A study of polysemy of "agent" based on the prototype theory. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 9(10), 441-447.
Eisenberg, N., Miller, P. A., Shell, R., Mcnalley, S., & Al, E. (1991). Prosocial development in adolescence:A longitudinal study.Developmental Psychology, 27(5), 849-857.
Greener, S. H., College, B., Georgia., & Crick, N. R. (1999). Normative beliefs about prosocial behavior in middle childhood:What does it mean to be nice? Social Development, 8(3), 349-363.
Greener, S. H. (2000). Peer assessment of children's prosocial behaviour. Journal of Moral Education, 29(1), 47-60.
Harasymchuk, C., & Fehr, B. (2012). A prototype analysis of relational boredom.Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(5), 627-646.
Hughes, C., McHarg, G., & White, N. (2018). Sibling influence on prosocial behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology, 20, 96-101.
Kearns, J. N., & Fincham, F. D. (2004). Aprototype analysis of forgiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(7), 838-855.
Krebs, D. L., & Hesteren, F. V. (1994). The development of altruism:Toward an integrative model. Developmental Review, 14(2), 103-158.
Malti, T., Averdijk, M., Zuffiano, A., Ribeaud, D., Betts, L. R., Rotenberg, K. J., & Eisner, M. P. (2016). Children's trust and the development of prosocial behavior. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 40(3), 262-270.
Malti, T., & Dys, S. P. (2018). From being nice to being kind:development of prosocial behaviors.Current Opinion in Psychology, 20, 45-49.
Manoharan, C., & Munck, V. C. (2017). The conceptual relationship between love,romantic love, and sex. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(2), 248-265.
Marti-Vilar, M., Corell-Garcia, L., & Merino-Soto,C. (2019). Systematic review of prosocial behavior measure. Revista de Psicologia, 37(1), 349-377.
Munck, V. C., Kronenfeld, D.B., & Manoharan, C. (2021). A prototype analysis of the cultural and evolutionary construction of romantic love as a synthesis of love and sex. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 21, 25-48.
Rips, L. J., Shoben, E. J., & Smith, E. E. (1973). Semantic distance and the verification of semantic relations.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 12(1), 1-20.
Rosch, E. H. (1973). Natural categories.Cognitive Psychology, 4(3), 328-350.
Rosch, E. H., & Eleanor. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology-General, 104(3), 192-233.
Rushton, J. P., Chrisjohn, R. D., & Fdkken, G. C. (1981). The altruistic personality and the self-report altruism scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 2(4), 293-302.
Sproull, L., Conley, C.A., & Moon, J. Y. (2011). Prosocial behavior on the net.Daedalus, 140(4), 140-153.
Taylor, S. E., Peplau. L. A., & Sears, D. O. (2004).Social Psychology. Peking:Peking University Press.
Visser, I. (2002). Prototypes of gender:Conceptions of feminine and masculine. Women's Studies International Forum, 25(5), 529-539.
Wispe, L. G. (1972). Positive forms of social behavior:An overview.Journal of Social Issues, 28(3), 1-19.
丁子恩, 刘勤学. (2020). 大学生网络交往与网络利他行为的关系:自尊与公我意识的作用. 心理发展与教育, 36(2), 175-183.
侯芬, 伍新春, 邹盛奇, 刘畅, 黄彬彬. (2018). 父母教养投入对青少年亲社会行为的影响:亲子依恋的中介作用. 心理发展与教育, 34(4), 417-425.
寇彧, 付艳, 张庆鹏. (2007). 青少年认同的亲社会行为:一项焦点群体访谈研究. 社会学研究, 3, 154-173.
寇彧, 张庆鹏. (2006). 青少年亲社会行为的概念表征研究. 社会学研究, 5, 169-187.
寇彧, 张庆鹏, 付艳. (2008). 原型理论视野中的亲社会行为研究. 心理与行为研究, 6(2), 137-143.
李丹, 夏飞羚. (2003). 儿童心目中的友好行为及其年龄发展趋势. 心理发展与教育, 19(1), 1-4.
刘勤学, 孙佳宁, 余思. (2019). 社交网站中的自我呈现与青少年网络利他行为:网络社交效能和希望的作用. 心理发展与教育,35(5), 530-539.
尚思源, 苏彦捷. (2020). 道德认知, 道德情绪与亲社会行为的关系:来自元分析的证据. 科学通报, 65(19), 2021-2031.
施兵.(2003). 语义成分分析法综述. 合肥工业大学学报(社会科学版), 17(4), 130-133.
王梦, 李娜. (2019). 原型范畴理论视角下的网络词汇演变探析. 河北大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 44(2), 32-37.
魏晓斌. (2010). 语义成分分析法之瑕瑜辨析. 西南科技大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 27(5), 51-55.
夏晓彤, 段锦云, 黄辛隐. (2021). 错失恐惧对亲社会行为的影响. 心理发展与教育, 37(3), 344-352.
肖凤秋, 郑志伟, 陈英和. (2014). 亲社会行为产生机制的理论演进. 心理科学, 37(5), 1263-1270.
谢晓非, 王逸璐, 顾思义, 李蔚. (2017). 利他仅仅利他吗?——进化视角的双路径模型. 心理科学进展, 25(9), 1441-1455.
颜红菊. (2009). 认知视角下的语义成分分析法. 湖南大学学报(社会科学版), 23(3), 96-100.
杨莹, 张梦圆, 寇彧. (2016). 青少年亲社会行为量表的编制与维度的再验证. 中国社会心理学评论, 10, 135-150.
张良林. (2010). 试析语义成分分析法的意义. 江西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 43(3), 127-131.
张梦圆, 杨莹, 寇彧. (2015). 青少年的亲社会行为及其发展. 青年研究, 403(4), 10-18.
张庆鹏. (2012). 概念表征视角下亲社会行为的测评维度和机制研究(博士学位论文). 北京师范大学.

相关文章 15

[1]	银小兰, 周路军, 朱翠英. 学校环境对农村留守儿童亲社会行为的影响:心理资本与生活满意度的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(4): 497-504.
[2]	赵纤, 王志航, 王东方, 袁言云, 尹霞云, 黎志华. 贫困家庭儿童在青少年早期的亲社会行为发展轨迹:性别及父母教养方式异质性的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(3): 323-332.
[3]	李强强, 胡佳. 时间定价启动与主观社会阶层对亲社会行为的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(3): 360-368.
[4]	雷晓玲, 赵冬梅, 杨文娇, 田晓红. 青少年家庭功能与亲社会行为的关系:一个有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(6): 786-792.
[5]	王斯麒, 赵彬璇, 吴红, 刘伟. 婚姻质量对儿童亲社会行为的影响:父母积极情绪表达和教养行为的链式中介作用及其性别差异[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(3): 323-330.
[6]	唐蕾, 刘衍玲, 杨营凯. 亲社会行为的认知过程及脑神经基础[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(3): 437-446.
[7]	马利, 王滔. 残疾儿童心理健康对家长亲职压力的影响:有调节的中介效应[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(1): 126-133.
[8]	夏晓彤, 段锦云, 黄辛隐. 错失恐惧对亲社会行为的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(3): 344-352.
[9]	李倩倩, 姚力宁, 梁金军, 邢淑芬. 电视暴力对不同外倾性气质学前儿童社会行为的差异化影响——“一般攻击模型”与“催化剂模型”的理论之争[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(5): 545-554.
[10]	张云运, 刘思辰, 任萍, 牛丽丽. 学生学业和行为特征如何影响教师支持？来自个体和圈子层面的证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(3): 318-328.
[11]	方建东, 常保瑞. 怀旧与亲社会行为的关系:一个有中介的调节模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(3): 303-311.
[12]	侯芬, 伍新春, 邹盛奇, 刘畅, 黄彬彬. 父母教养投入对青少年亲社会行为的影响:亲子依恋的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2018, 34(4): 417-425.
[13]	王文超, 伍新春, 田雨馨, 周宵. 青少年创伤后应激障碍和创伤后成长对亲社会行为的影响:生命意义的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2018, 34(1): 112-119.
[14]	杨莹, 寇彧. 亲社会自主动机对青少年幸福感及亲社会行为的影响:基本心理需要满足的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2017, 33(2): 163-171.
[15]	魏星, 吕娜, 纪林芹, 陈亮, 张文新. 童年晚期亲社会行为与儿童的心理社会适应[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(4): 402-410.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed