All issues
Volume 48 (2008 - 200･･･
- Issue 2 Pages 99-
- Issue 1 Pages 1-
Volume 48, Issue 2
Displaying 1-7 of 7 articles from this issue
- |<
- <
- 1
- >
- >|
Original Articles
-
Mizuho Shinada2009 Volume 48 Issue 2 Pages 99-110
Published: 2009
Released on J-STAGE: March 26, 2009
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSRecent experimental studies have demonstrated that third-party participants are willing to pay a cost in order to punish cheaters in social exchanges, even if no discernable advantage can be gained by the individual him or herself. In this paper, we argue that third-party punishment is actually a form of second-order cooperation used to maintain first-order cooperation during social exchange. Given that first-order cooperation is often extended preferentially toward ingroup rather than outgroup members, we predicted that third-party punishment should be similarly biased towards ingroup members. Shinada, Yamagishi & Ohmura (2004) showed that cooperators punish non-cooperative in-group members more severely than they do non-cooperative out-group members, but non-cooperators punish non-cooperative out-group members more severely than in-group members. We argue that the competitive social motivation to enhance one's relative standing against others is the dominant motivational basis of punishing out-group members. To test the hypotheses that third-party punishment is directed to in-group members, and out-group punishment is reduced punishing the other does not put one at an advantage, participants were given the opportunity to punish ingroup members (undergraduates from the same department) and outgroup members (from another department) during a gift-giving game. The results supported our hypothesis; both cooperators and non-cooperators paid more money to punish ingroup cheaters than outgroup cheaters.
View full abstractDownload PDF (299K) -
Makoto Nakajima, Toshikazu Yoshida2009 Volume 48 Issue 2 Pages 111-121
Published: 2009
Released on J-STAGE: March 26, 2009
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSThis study aimed to explore whether individuals who had been inequitably treated in one relationship will redress inequity in a different relationship. An experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of two internal factors on reward allocation in a trans-relational exchange situation. One was the Helping Norm, pertaining to prosocial behavior, and the other was Belief in a Just World (BJW), which was expected to buffer against anger. A total of 161 undergraduates participated in the experiment for two trials. In the first session, each participant was assigned to one of 3 conditions: over-rewarded, equitably rewarded, or under-rewarded, relative to their partners. In the second session, they could distribute the rewards between themselves and their partners. The results were consistent with the Equity with the World (EwW) hypothesis, although reward allocation was affected by internal factors. In the under-rewarded condition, the participants who scored high on the helping norm allocated rewards more equitably. An analysis of their emotions showed two possible processes as to why the participants allocated rewards equitably: those high in BJW were less likely to experience negative emotions from previous inequities, while those high in the helping norm felt a more positive emotion, which motivated them to allocate rewards equitably. These findings indicate not all people conform to the EwW.
View full abstractDownload PDF (354K) -
Chika Harada, Hiroyuki Yoshizawa, Toshikazu Yoshida2009 Volume 48 Issue 2 Pages 122-136
Published: 2009
Released on J-STAGE: March 26, 2009
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSThis study focused on two facets of self-regulation, i.e. an ability facet acquired through an individual's development process, and a temperament facet based on biological antecedents. This study examined the effects of these facets on delinquent and socially inconsiderate behavior. Data were collected from 414 high school students, and 227 college students. Temperament was assessed by the Behavioral Inhibition System/Behavioral Approach System (BIS/BAS) scales, along with the Effortful Control (EC) scale, and ability was assessed by the Social Self-Regulation (SSR) scale. Results of structural equation modeling revealed the following: 1) The path structure of BIS/BAS and EC leading to SSR was revealed: 2) The direct effect of SSR on antisocial behavior was stronger than temperament: 3) The direct effects of BIS/BAS and EC differed between delinquent behavior and socially inconsiderate behavior: 4) An interaction effect between self-assertiveness and self-inhibition was found in the relationship between SSR and delinquent behavior. From these findings, we discussed potential explanations and implications for future research.
View full abstractDownload PDF (448K) -
Katsuya Yamori2009 Volume 48 Issue 2 Pages 137-149
Published: 2009
Released on J-STAGE: March 26, 2009
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSThe concept of normalcy bias occupies a central position in research on disaster psychology. This paper reexamined the theoretical validity of this concept from a social constructionist perspective. The concept has been useful in identifying optimistically biased decisions that people often make upon receiving a disaster alert. However, we argue that this bias is not strong when people actually face an alert, but it is actually developed after the event, as the result of post-event attempts to gain a grasp of the actual situation surrounding the state of emergency. It is suggested that the misconception of the normalcy bias stems from certain epistemological and practical assumptions that are made when observing and explaining actions of people before and after a disaster alert. Based on these assumptions, both negative and positive consequences of this misconception in conventional disaster reduction practices have been investigated. It is proposed that the "co-construction of social reality" of a disaster event is an alternative way of making sense, one which may replace the normalcy bias, and thereby reshape the contemporary, overly information-dependent disaster reduction practices.
View full abstractDownload PDF (327K)
Short Articles
-
Rumiko Dohke, Koji Murata2009 Volume 48 Issue 2 Pages 150-158
Published: 2009
Released on J-STAGE: March 26, 2009
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSThis study replicated the findings by Gilbert, Morewedge, Risen, & Wilson (2004), who discovered that when people nearly missed succeeding, they anticipated a stronger intensity of regret than what they actually experienced, which is known as impact bias. We investigated the impact bias through both intensity and duration, by measuring the intensity of regret right after negative feedback, and then again 10 minutes later. Participants took part in a quiz in which they were eligible to win an attractive prize, but were given feedback that they nearly won or clearly lost. Half of the participants were asked to predict how much regret they would feel immediately, and 10 minutes after the negative feedback, while the remaining half reported on how much regret they actually experienced immediately and after 10 minutes. As expected, in the nearly won condition, the intensity of anticipated regret was stronger than experienced regret, both immediately and 10 minutes after the negative feedback. However, in the clearly lost condition, the intensity of anticipated regret was not stronger than actually experienced regret. The impact bias of regret, therefore, was found in the nearly won condition, but not in the clearly lost. Discussion was made of the duration of regret, and the conditions that reduce impact bias.
View full abstractDownload PDF (267K) -
Haruto Takagishi, Nobuyuki Takahashi, Toshio Yamagishi2009 Volume 48 Issue 2 Pages 159-166
Published: 2009
Released on J-STAGE: March 26, 2009
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSHumans have a predisposition to take punitive action toward unfairness, even when the target is a stranger. Experiments using the ultimatum game have revealed that the unfair intent of the proposer plays an important role in determining action toward alleviating unfairness on the part of the disadvantaged. This study utilized a similar experimental paradigm to examine whether this same result can be seen when a third party, rather than the disadvantaged him/herself, attempts to restitute fairness. Results indicated that the level of punishment was greater in the unfair-intent condition relative to no-intent. However, even in the no-intent condition, many participants preferred to punish (63%, 40 of 63 participants) in this study involving third-party punishment, compared to previous studies of second-party punishment (15 to 18%). Inequity-aversion of resources regardless of intention appears to play a much greater role in third-party punishment than in the second-party punishment, in which reciprocity plays a prominent role.
View full abstractDownload PDF (233K) -
Tomoichiro Matsumoto, Naoki Kugihara2009 Volume 48 Issue 2 Pages 167-173
Published: 2009
Released on J-STAGE: March 26, 2009
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSThis study examined nursing staff's stress response in connection with the quality of relationship with supervisors, their perception of the supervisor's evaluation of their relationship, and stress coping. Examinations of both formal and informal relationships with supervisors demonstrated that the latter affected their psychological stress responses more than the former. Stress connected to emotional suppression was found in relationships with supervisors as well as with patients. Perception of supervisors' evaluations of informal relationships with them was positively associated with psychological stress. Results for interpersonal stress coping were generally consistent with an earlier study dealing with relationships among patients and nurses. Therefore, interpersonal stress among nurses derives from both patients and supervisors.
View full abstractDownload PDF (219K)
- |<
- <
- 1
- >
- >|