心理发展与教育 ›› 2018, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (5): 513-522.doi: 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2018.05.01

• 认知与社会性发展 •    下一篇

面孔二态性对学前儿童信任行为的影响——来自人格标签的解释

陈丽君1,2, 王欣1, 赵陵波1, 陈昕1, 王益文1,2   

  1. 1. 福州大学人文学院心理学系, 福建福州 350116;
    2. 福州大学心理与认知科学研究所, 福建福州 350116
  • 出版日期:2018-09-15 发布日期:2018-10-25
  • 通讯作者: 王益文,E-mail:wangeven@126.com E-mail:wangeven@126.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(31771238);国家社会科学基金教育学青年课题(CEA150173)。

The Influence of Facial Dimorphism on Preschoolers'Trust: Explanation from the Perspective of Personality Label

CHEN Lijun1,2, WANG Xin1, ZHAO Lingbo1, CHEN Xin1, WANG Yiwen1,2   

  1. 1. Department of psychology, Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, Fuzhou University, Fujian, Fuzhou 350116;
    2. Institute of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Fuzhou University, Fujian, Fuzhou 350116
  • Online:2018-09-15 Published:2018-10-25

摘要: 面孔二态性是指成熟男性和女性经过青春期第二性征的发展后逐步形成了面孔上的性别特征,男性化与女性化是这一维度的两个水平。本研究探索面孔二态性是否会对学龄前儿童信任行为产生影响,并从幼儿对二态性面孔的人格标签角度来解释。实验1修订信任博弈任务(Trust game),考察学前儿童信任行为是否会因搭档面孔的二态性(男性化和女性化)而不同,经历负性反馈后被试在下轮游戏中信任选择率是否会下降;实验2让学前儿童选择人格形容词来描述不同性别化的面孔,探讨幼儿对不同二态性面孔是否已形成不同的人格标签。结果表明学前儿童对女性化面孔信任选择率最高;在遭遇负性反馈后的下一轮游戏中,幼儿对他人的信任率显著下降;学前儿童认为女性化面孔更具有积极人格,而更多将男性化面孔与消极人格词汇匹配。由此,二态性面孔影响学前儿童的信任行为,在于他们对二态性面孔已形成不同的人格标签。

关键词: 面孔二态性, 人格标签, 学前儿童, 信任博弈

Abstract: Sexual dimorphism in adult human faces reflect the masculinisation or feminisation of secondary sexual characteristics that occurs at puberty. This research aimed to explore if the facial dimorphism influence 4-6 years old children's trust, and used the personality label of dimorphic faces to explain preschooler's trust behaviors. In experiment 1, we revised Trust Game to explore whether the preschoolers trust was affected by the partner's facial dimorphism, and whether the trust rate decreased on the whole after encountering the negative feedback. In experiment 2, participants were asked to match the faces and the personality adjective words, This experiment aimed to confirm whether the preschoolers had different personality labels for dimorphic faces. The results showed that the preschool children had a highest rate of trust on the partners with feminine faces. If receiving negative feedback after choosing trust their partners, the preschoolers' trust rate significantly decreased in the next choice. Preschoolers tended to use the positive personality tag to understand the feminine faces and use negative words to explain the masculine faces. So, it can be concluded that Facial dimorphism affected children's trust, because they have formed the completely opposite personality label towards different dimorphic faces.

Key words: facial dimorphism, personality label, preschoolers, trust game

中图分类号: 

  • B844
Bascandziev, I., & Harris, P. L. (2014). In beauty we trust:children prefer information from more attractive informants. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 32(1), 94-99.
Boothroyd, L. G., Jones, B. C., Burt, D. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2007). Partner characteristics associated with masculinity, health and maturity in male faces. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(5), 1161-1173.
Boyle, R., & Bonacich, P. (1970). The Development of Trust and Mistrust in Mixed-Motive Games. Sociometry, 33(2), 123-139
Brambilla, M., Sacchi, S., Rusconi, P., Cherubini, P., & Yzerbyt, V. (2012). You want to give a good impression? Be honest! Moral traits dominate group impression formation. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 51(1), 149-166.
Buchan, N. R., Croson, R. T., & Solnick, S. (2008). Trust and gender:An examination of behavior and beliefs in the Investment Game. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 68(3), 466-476.
Campellone, T. R., & Kring, A. M. (2013). Who do you trust? The impact of facial emotion and behaviour on decision making. Cognition & emotion, 27(4), 603-620.
Chang, L. J., Doll, B. B., Wout, M. V., Frank, M. J., & Sanfey, A. G. (2010). Seeing is believing:trustworthiness as a dynamic belief. Cognitive Psychology, 61(2), 87-105.
Chen, J., Zhong, J., Zhang, Y., Li, P., Zhang, A., Tan, Q., & Li, H. (2012). Electrophysiological correlates of processing facial attractiveness and its influence on cooperative behavior. Neuroscience Letters, 517(2), 65-70.
Cogsdill, E. J., & Banaji, M. R. (2015). Face-trait inferences show robust child-adult agreement:evidence from three types of faces. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 60, 150-156.
Corriveau, K., & Harris, P. L. (2009). Choosing your informant:Weighing familiarity and recent accuracy. Development Science, 12(3), 426-437.
Corriveau, K. H., Meints, K., & Harris, P. L. (2009). Early tracking of informant accuracy and inaccuracy. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 27(2), 331-342.
Croson, R., & Gneezy, U. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic literature, 47(2), 448-474.
Debruine, L. M., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., Boothroyd, L. G., Perrett, D. I., Penton-Voak, I. S., et al. (2006). Correlated preferences for facial masculinity and ideal or actual partner's masculinity. Proceedings Biological Sciences, 273(1592), 1355-1360.
Delgado, M. R., Frank, R. H., & Phelps, E. A. (2005). Perceptions of moral character modulate the neural systems of reward during the trust game. Nature neuroscience, 8(11), 1611-1618.
Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of personality and social psychology, 24(3), 285-290.
Duarte, J., Siegel, S., & Young, L. (2012). Trust and credit:the role of appearance in peer-to-peer lending. The Review of Financial Studies, 25(8), 2455-2484.
Engell, A. D., Haxby, J. V., & Todorov, A. (2007). Implicit trustworthiness decisions:automatic coding of face properties in the human amygdala. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 19(9), 1508-1519.
Evans, A. M., Athenstaedt, U., & Krueger, J. I. (2013). The development of trust and altruism during childhood. Journal of Economic Psychology, 36, 82-95.
Evans, A. M., & Krueger, J. I. (2011). Elements of trust:Risk and perspective-taking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(1), 171-177.
Ewing, L., Caulfield, F., Read, A., & Rhodes, G. (2015). Perceived trustworthiness of faces drives trust behaviour in children. Developmental Science, 18(2), 327-334.
Fehr, E., Bernhard, H., & Rockenbach, B. (2008). Egalitarianism in young children. Nature, 454(7208), 1079-1083.
Fiske, S. T., Gilbert, D. T., & Lindzey, G. (2010). Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2):John Wiley & Sons.
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the big-five structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26-42.
Johnston, V. S., Hagel, R., Franklin, M., Fink, B., & Grammer, K. (2001). Male facial attractiveness:Evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(4), 251-267.
Jones, B. C., Vukovic, J., Little, A. C., Roberts, S. C., & Debruine, L. M. (2011). Circum-menopausal changes in women's preferences for sexually dimorphic shape cues in peer-aged faces. Biological Psychology, 87(3), 453-455.
Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., & Debruine, L. M. (2011). Facial attractiveness:evolutionary based research. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 366(1571), 1638-1659.
Ma, F., Xu, F., & Luo, X. (2015). Children's and Adults' Judgments of Facial Trustworthiness:The Relationship to Facial Attractiveness. Perceptual and motor skills, 121(1), 179-198.
McKone, E., & Boyer, B. L. (2006). Sensitivity of 4-year-olds to featural and second-order relational changes in face distinctiveness. Journal of experimental child psychology, 94(2), 134-162.
Oosterhof, N. N., & Todorov, A. (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(32), 11087-11092.
Penton-Voak, I. S., Perrett, D. I., Castles, D. L., Kobayashi, T., Burt, D. M., Murray, L. K., et al. (1999). Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature, 399(6738), 741-742.
Perrett, D. I., Lee, K. J., Penton-Voak, I., Rowland, D., Yoshikawa, S., Burt, D. M., et al. (1998). Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature, 394(6696), 884-887.
Rezlescu, C., Duchaine, B., Olivola, C. Y., & Chater, N. (2012). Unfakeable facial configurations affect strategic choices in trust games with or without information about past behavior. PLoS One, 7(3), e34293.
Rhodes, G. (2006). The Evolutionary Psychology of Facial Beauty. Annual Review of Psychology, 57(1), 199-226.
Short, L. A., Mondloch, C. J., Mccormick, C. M., Carré, J. M., Ma, R.Q., Fu, G. Y., et al. (2012). Detection of propensity for aggression based on facial structure irrespective of face race. Evolution & Human Behavior, 33(2), 121-129.
Smith, F. G., Jones, B. C., Welling, L. L. W., Little, A. C., Vukovic, J., Main, J. C., et al. (2009). Waist-hip ratio predicts women's preferences for masculine male faces, but not perceptions of men's trustworthiness. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(5), 476-480.
Swaddle, J. P., & Reierson, G. W. (2002). Testosterone increases perceived dominance but not attractiveness in human males. Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 269(1507), 2285-2289.
Todorov, A., Baron, S. G., & Oosterhof, N. N. (2008). Evaluating face trustworthiness:a model based approach. Social Cognitive Affective Neuroscience, 3(2), 119-127.
Todorov, A., & Engell, A. D. (2008). The role of the amygdala in implicit evaluation of emotionally neutral faces. Social Cognitive Affective Neuroscience, 3(4), 303-312.
Todorov, A., Said, C. P., Engell, A. D., & Oosterhof, N. N. (2008). Understanding evaluation of faces on social dimensions. Trends in cognitive sciences, 12(12), 455-460.
Todorov, A., Olivola, C. Y., Dotsch, R., & Mende-Siedlecki, P. (2015). Social attributions from faces:determinants, consequences, accuracy, and functional significance. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 519-545.
Valentine, T. (1991). A unified account of the effects of distinctiveness, inversion, and race in face recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43A(2), 161-204.
Van Dongen, S., & Gangestad, S. W. (2011). Human fluctuating asymmetry in relation to health and quality:a meta-analysis. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32(6), 380-398.
Vanderbilt, K. E., Liu, D., & Heyman, G. D. (2011). The development of distrust. Child development, 82(5), 1372-1380.
Walker, M., & Wänke, M. (2017). Caring or daring? Exploring the impact of facial masculinity/femininity and gender category information on first impressions. PLoS One, 12(10), e0181306.
Wang, F., & Yamagishi, T. (2005). Group-based trust and gender differences in China. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 8(2), 199-210.
Yu, M., Saleem, M., & Gonzalez, C. (2014). Developing trust:First impressions and experience. Journal of Economic Psychology, 43, 16-29.
Zheng, L., & Zheng, Y. (2015). Correlated preferences for male facial masculinity and partner traits in gay and bisexual men in China. Archives of sexual behavior, 44(5), 1423-1430.
陈丽君, 江洁, 任志洪, 袁宏. (2017). "阳刚"还是"清秀"更具吸引力?——对男性面孔二态性不同偏好的元分析. 心理科学进展, 25(4), 553-569.
李萍. (2015). 人格双性化对面孔二态化偏好的影响研究(硕士学位论文). 东南大学,南京.
李婷玉, 刘黎, 朱莉琪. (2017). 4~6岁幼儿经济博弈中的信任行为及其影响因素. 心理学报, 49(1), 17-27.
卢勤, 苏彦捷. (2004). 性别角色与基本人格维度的相关研究. 北京大学学报:自然科学版, 40(4), 642-651.
马凤玲, 汤玉龙, 郑婷婷, 徐芬. (2014). 3~5 岁幼儿基于面孔的信任判断的发展. 心理发展与教育, 30(4), 337-344.
王益文, 付超, 任相峰, 林羽中, 郭丰波, 张振, 黄亮,袁博,郑玉玮. (2017). 自恋人格调节信任博弈的结果评价. 心理学报, 49(8), 1080-1088.
温芳芳, 佐斌. (2012). 男性化与女性化对面孔偏好的影响——基于图像处理技术和眼动的检验. 心理学报, 44(1), 14-29.
徐芬, 王珍珍, 李欢, 马凤玲. (2015). 小学儿童信任倾向的发展特点及其与人格特征的关系. 应用心理学, 21(4), 299-307.
郑璞, 俞国良, 郑友富. (2010). 经济博弈中儿童信任的发展. 心理发展与教育, 26(4), 378-383.
[1] 冷欣怡, 苏萌萌, 李文玲, 杨秀杰, 邢爱玲, 张湘琳, 舒华. 家庭环境与农村儿童早期语言发展的关系[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(1): 8-18.
[2] 白荣, 闫嵘, 王千, 李叶, 邢淑芬. 学前儿童执行功能与问题行为的关系:情境和性别的特异性[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(1): 35-44.
[3] 张光珍, 梁淼, 梁宗保. 父母教养方式影响学前儿童社会适应的追踪研究:自我控制的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(6): 800-807.
[4] 占淑玮, 杨宁, 赵必华. 留守学前儿童接受性语言能力与社会退缩的关系:有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(6): 834-844.
[5] 王英杰, 李燕, 吴凡. 家庭功能与学前儿童行为问题的关系:依恋回避和社交焦虑的多重中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(1): 76-83.
[6] 张凡, 赵德懋, 刘霞, 白荣, 张明亮, 邢淑芬. 父母教养与MAOA基因rs6323多态性对学前儿童外化问题的共同作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(6): 659-667.
[7] 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.
[8] 于晓, 王红梅, 陈英和, 刘瑞曙, 韩瑽瑽, 韩敏, 张涵, 刘静. 分心抑制和关系整合对学前儿童类比推理的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(4): 385-393.
[9] 姚力宁, 高金帆, 贺立竞, 高鑫, 崔慧欣, 邢淑芬. 睡眠时间参数对学前儿童问题行为的影响:消极情绪性的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(6): 710-718.
[10] 王静梅, 张义宾, 郑晨烨, 卢英俊, 秦金亮. 3~6岁儿童执行功能子成分发展的研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(1): 1-10.
[11] 张润竹, 赵一萌, 秦荣彩, 王振宏. 学前儿童迷走神经活动与情绪反应、情绪调节及冲动性的关系[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2018, 34(1): 1-9.
[12] 梁宗保, 胡瑞, 张光珍, 邓慧华, 夏敏. 母亲元情绪理念与学前儿童社会适应的相互作用关系[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(4): 394-401.
[13] 牛玉柏, 时冉冉, 曹贤才. 学前儿童近似数量系统敏锐度与符号数学能力的关系[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(2): 129-138.
[14] 田丽丽, 周欣, 康丹, 徐晶晶, 李正清. 5~6岁不同数学能力水平儿童的执行功能差异研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(1): 9-16.
[15] 梁宗保, 杨雪莉, 张光珍, 姜宁, 邓慧华, 叶明. 父母述情困难与儿童行为问题:父母心境的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(4): 459-466.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!