经济博弈中的公平理论及公平规范执行的群体偏见
Fairness Theory in Economic Games and Group Bias of Fairness Norm Enforcement

DOI: 10.12677/AP.2021.114107, PP. 940-950

Keywords: 经济博弈范式，公平理论，群体偏见，公平规范执行，内群体偏爱，黑羊效应
Economic Game Paradigm, Fairness Theory, Group Bias, Fairness Norm Enforcement, In-Group Bias, Black Sheep Effect

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

公平是群际互动中最重要的规范之一，它是群体成员在一定的社会情境下如何行为的规范。历年来，经济学家和社会心理学家运用行为博弈的经典范式——最后通牒博弈范式及其相关变式探究个体的公平偏好、利他、互惠等行为。对于经济博弈中个体违背“理性人假设”的现象，学者们分别提出了不平等厌恶、互惠偏好、平等–互惠–竞争三种理论来解释其背后的心理机制。群体认同是指个体对其所属群体身份的知觉及其所付诸于该群体身份上的价值与情绪，直接影响着群际互动中人们的公平规范执行行为。研究者发现在群体偏见影响公平规范执行时会产生内群体偏爱(In-group Bias)和黑羊效应(the Black Sheep Effect, BSE)两种现象，表现为相比于外群体，个体更愿意接受内群体成员的不公平提议或者更多拒绝内群体成员的不公平提议。当前研究者分别通过纯粹偏好理论(Mere Preference Theory, MPT)和规范聚焦假设(Norms-Focused Hypothesis, NFH)来解释上述相悖的现象。未来研究应侧重促进公平理论与群体偏见与公平规范执行理论的交叉共融，拓宽群体偏见与公平规范研究的群体范围，增加得失框架下群体偏见与公平规范的研究。
Fairness is one of the most important norms in group interaction. It is a norm for how group members behave in a certain social situation. Over the years, economists and social psychologists have used the classic paradigm of behavioral games—Ultimatum game paradigm and its related variants to explore individual behaviors such as fairness preferences, altruism, and reciprocity. Regarding the phenomenon that individuals violate the “rational man hypothesis” in economic games, scholars have put forward three theories to explain the psychological mechanism behind it, such as inequality aversion, reciprocity preference and equality-reciprocity-competition. Group identity refers to some knowledge of one’s group membership together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership, which directly affects people’s fairness norm enforcement during inter-group context. Researchers have found that when group biases affect the implementation of fair norms, there will be two phenomena: In-group Bias and the Black Sheep Effect, which are manifested in that individuals were more likely to accept unfair offer from in-groups or more likely to reject unfair proposals offered by in-group members compared with out-group members. Currently, norms-focused hypothesis and mere preferences theory have usually been used to explain the above contradictory phenomena. Based on this review, future research should focus on promoting the integration of fairness theory and group bias of fairness norm enforcement theory, broaden the group scope of group bias and fairness norm research, and enhance the research on group bias and fairness norm under the framework of gains and losses.

References

[1]	韩小丽, 田孟奇, 田嘉乐, 苏文亮(2020). 最后通牒博弈的研究范式述评及其对结果的影响. 中国临床心理学杂志, 28(5), 891-896.
[2]	李炜(2019). 社会公平感: 结构与变动趋势(2006-2017年). 华中科技大学学报(社会科学版), 33(6), 110-121.
[3]	李雪莹, 贾宁(2020). 经济博弈中公平感知及行为决策的影响因素的述评与展望. 心理技术与应用, 8(11), 691-700.
[4]	唐俊(2011). 行为博弈的互惠利他行为理论研究的进展. 现代经济探讨, (6), 41-44+83.
[5]	王益文, 张振, 张蔚, 黄亮, 郭丰波, 等(2014). 群体身份调节最后通牒博弈的公平关注. 心理学报, 46(12), 1850-1859.
[6]	王珍珍, 蒋文明(2016). 公平加工的情境依赖性: 来自行为的证据. 心理与行为研究, 14(5), 600-604+646.
[7]	徐富明, 李欧, 邓颖, 刘程浩, 史燕伟(2016). 行为经济学中的不平等规避. 心理科学进展, 24(10), 1613-1622.
[8]	张瀚月, 赵玉芳(2018). 社会距离对不公平行为回应的影响. 西南大学学报(自然科学版), 40(2), 140-145.
[9]	张莹瑞, 佐斌(2006). 社会认同理论及其发展. 心理科学进展, 14(3), 475-480.
[10]	张振, 齐春辉, 王洋, 赵辉, 王小新, 等(2020). 内群体偏爱或黑羊效应? 经济博弈中公平规范执行的群体偏见. 心理科学进展, 28(2), 329-339.
[11]	Abrams, D., Palmer, S. B., Rutland, A., Cameron, L., & Van de Vyver, J. (2014). Evaluations of and Reasoning about Normative and Deviant Ingroup and Outgroup Members: Development of the Black Sheep Effect. Developmental Psychology, 50, 258-270. https://doi.or/10.1037/a0032461
[12]	Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in Social Exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 267-299. https://doi.or/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60108-2
[13]	Ba？i？, Z., Falk, A., & Kosse, F. (2020). The Development of Egalitarian Norm Enforcement in Childhood and Adolescence. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 179, 667-680. https://doi.or/10.1016/j.jebo.2019.03.014
[14]	Biella, M., & Sacchi, S. (2018). Not Fair but Acceptable… for Us! Group Membership Influences the Tradeoff between Equality and Utility in a Third Party Ultimatum Game. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 77, 117-131. https://doi.or/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.04.007
[15]	Biernat, M., Vescio, T. K., & Billings, L. S. (1999). Black Sheep and Expectancy Violation: Integrating Two Models of Social Judgment. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 523-542. https://doi.or/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199906)29:4<523::AID-EJSP944>3.0.CO;2-J
[16]	Bolton, G. E., & Ockenfels, A. (2000). ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition. American Economic Review, 90, 166-193. https://doi.or/10.1257/aer.90.1.166
[17]	Bra？as-Garza, P., Cobo-Reyes, R., Espinosa, M. P., Jiménez, N., Ková？ík, J. et al. (2009). Altruism and Social Integration. Games and Economic Behavior, 69, 249-257. https://doi.or/10.1016/j.geb.2009.10.014
[18]	Brewer, M. B. (1979). In-Group Bias in the Minimal Intergroup Situation: A Cognitive-Motivational Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307-324. https://doi.or/10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.307
[19]	Brewer, M. B. (1999). The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429-444. https://doi.or/10.1111/0022-4537.00126
[20]	Camerer, C. F. (2003). Strategizing in the Brain. Science, 300, 1673-1675. https://doi.or/10.1126/science.1086215
[21]	Cheng, X., Zheng, L. et al. (2015). Power to Punish Norm Violations Affects the Neural Processes of Fairness-Related Decision Making. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 344. https://doi.or/10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00344
[22]	De Dreu, C. K. W., & Kret, M. E. (2015). Oxytocin Conditions Intergroup Relations Through Upregulated In-Group Empathy, Cooperation, Conformity, and Defense. Biological Psychiatry, 79, 165-173. https://doi.or/10.1016/j.biopsych.2015.03.020
[23]	Dick, R. V., Haslam, A., Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2001). Cooperation in Groups. Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Behavioral Engagement. Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisations Psychologie A&O, 45, 212-213. https://doi.or/10.1026//0932-4089.45.4.212
[24]	El Zein, M., Seikus, C., De-Wit, L., & Bahrami, B. (2019). Pu-nishing the Individual or the Group for Norm Violation. Wellcome Open Research, 4, 139-139. https://doi.or/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15474.1
[25]	Engel, C. (2011). Dictator Games: A Meta Study. Experimental Economics, 14, 583-610. https://doi.or/10.1007/s10683-011-9283-7
[26]	Everett, J. A. C., Faber, N. S., Crockett, M. J., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2015). Economic Games and Social Neuroscience Methods Can help Elucidate the Psychology of Parochial Altruism. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 861. https://doi.or/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00861
[27]	Fatfouta, R., Meshi, D., Merkl, A., & Heekeren, H. R. (2018). Accepting Unfairness by a Significant Other Is Associated with Reduced Connectivity between Medial Prefrontal and Dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex. Social Neuroscience, 13, 61-73. https://doi.or/10.1080/17470919.2016.1252795
[28]	Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2004). Social Norms and Human Cooperation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 185-190. https://doi.or/10.1016/j.tics.2004.02.007
[29]	Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A Theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 817-868. https://doi.or/10.1162/003355399556151
[30]	Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U., & G？chter, S. (2002). Strong Reciprocity, Human Cooperation, and the Enforcement of Social Norms. Human Nature, 13, 1-25. https://doi.or/10.1007/s12110-002-1012-7
[31]	Forsythe, R., Horowitz, J. L., Savin, N. E., & Sefton, M. (1994). Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments. Games & Economic Behavior, 6, 347-369. https://doi.or/10.1006/game.1994.1021
[32]	Geanakoplos, J., Pearce, D., & Stacchetti, E. (1989). Psychological Games and Sequential Rationality. Games & Economic Behavior, 1, 60-79. https://doi.or/10.1016/0899-8256(89)90005-5
[33]	Glimcher, P., Camerer, C., & Fehr, E. (2008). Decision Making and the Brain. London: Academic Press.
[34]	Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982). An Experimental Analysis of Ultimatum Bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 3, 367-388. https://doi.or/10.1016/0167-2681(82)90011-7
[35]	Hewig, J., Kretschmer, N., Trippe, R. H., Hecht, H., Coles, M. G. H. et al. (2011). Why Humans Deviate from Rational Choice. Psychophysiology, 48, 507-514. https://doi.or/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01081.x
[36]	Hogg, M. A., Abrams, D., & Brewer, M. B. (2017). Social Identity: The Role of Self in Group Processes and Intergroup Relations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20, 570-581. https://doi.or/10.1177/1368430217690909
[37]	Jordan, J. J., Mcauliffe, K., & Warneken, F. (2014). Development of In-Group Favoritism in Children’s Third-Party Punishment of Selfishness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111, 12710-12715. https://doi.or/10.1073/pnas.1402280111
[38]	Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk Title. Econometrica, 47, 263-291. https://doi.or/10.2307/1914185
[39]	Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1986). Fairness and the As-sumptions of Economics. Journal of Business, 59, S285-S300. https://doi.or/10.1086/296367
[40]	Liu, Y., Bian, X., Hu, Y., Chen, Y.-T., Li, X. et al. (2018). Intergroup Bias Influences Third-Party Punishment and Compensation: In-Group Relationships Attenuate Altruistic Punishment. Social Behavior and Personality, 46, 1397-1408. https://doi.or/10.2224/sbp.7193
[41]	Klaus, F., Phillipps, C. B., Peter, T., Marieke, S., Elger, C. E. et al. (2012). Neural Responses to Advantageous and Disad-vantageous Inequity. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 165. https://doi.or/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00165
[42]	Marques, J. M., Yzerbyt, V. Y., & Leyens, J. P. (1988). The “Black Sheep Effect”: Extremity of Judgments towards Ingroup Members as a Function of Group Identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 1-16. https://doi.or/10.1002/ejsp.2420180102
[43]	Mcauliffe, K., & Dunham, Y. (2016). Group Bias in Cooperative Norm Enforcement. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 371, Article ID: 20150073. https://doi.or/10.1098/rstb.2015.0073
[44]	Mcauliffe, K., & Dunham, Y. (2017). Fairness Overrides Group Bias in Children’s Second-Party Punishment. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 146, 485-494. https://doi.or/10.1037/xge0000244
[45]	Mcauliffe, K., Blake, P. R., Steinbeis, N., & Warneken, F. (2017). The Developmental Foundations of Human Fairness. Nature Human Behaviour, 1, Article No. 0042. https://doi.or/10.1038/s41562-016-0042
[46]	Mendoza, S. A., Lane, S. P., & Amodio, D. M. (2014). For Members Only: Ingroup Punishment of Fairness Norm Violations in the Ultimatum Game. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 5, 662-670. https://doi.or/10.1177/1948550614527115
[47]	Neumann, J. V., & Morgenstern, O. (1953). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
[48]	Perner, W. J. (1983). Beliefs about Beliefs: Representation and Constraining Function of Wrong Beliefs in Young Children’s Understanding of Deception. Cognition, 13, 103-128. https://doi.or/10.1016/0010-0277(83)90004-5
[49]	Rabin, M. (1993). Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics. The American Economic Review, 83, 1281-1302.
[50]	Sanfey, A. G., Rilling, J. K., Aronson, J. A., Nystrom, L. E., & Cohen, J. D. (2003). The Neural Basis of Economic Decision-Making in the Ultimatum Game. Science, 300, 1755-1758. https://doi.or/10.1126/science.1082976
[51]	Schiller, B., Baumgartner, T., & Knoch, D. (2014). Intergroup Bias in Third-Party Punishment Stems from Both Ingroup Favoritism and Outgroup Discrimination. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35, 169-175. https://doi.or/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.12.006
[52]	Sun, L., Tan, P., Cheng, Y., Chen, J., & Qu, C. (2015). The Effect of Altruistic Tendency on Fairness in Third-Party Punishment. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 820. https://doi.or/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00820
[53]	Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict. Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 33, 94-109.
[54]	Valenzuela, A., & Srivastava, J. (2012). Role of Information Asymmetry and Situational Salience in Reducing Intergroup Bias: The Case of Ultimatum Games. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1671-1683. https://doi.or/10.1177/0146167212458327
[55]	Wang, Y., Zhang, Z., Bai, L., Lin, C., Osinsky, R. et al. (2017). Ingroup/Outgroup Membership Modulates Fairness Consideration: Neural Signatures from ERPs and EEG Oscillations. Scientific Reports, 7, Article No. 39827. https://doi.or/10.1038/srep39827
[56]	Weiland, S., Hewig, J., Hecht, H., Mussel, P., & Miltner, W. H. R. (2012). Neural Correlates of Fair Behavior in Interpersonal Bargaining. Social Neuroscience, 7, 537-551. https://doi.or/10.1080/17470919.2012.674056
[57]	Weisel, O., & B？hm, R. (2015). “Ingroup Love” and “Outgroup Hate” in Intergroup Conflict between Natural Groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 60, 110-120. https://doi.or/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.04.008
[58]	Wu, Y., Leliveld, M. C., & Zhou, X. (2011). Social Distance Modulates Recipient’s Fairness Consideration in the Dictator Game: An ERP Study. Biological Psychology, 88, 253-262. https://doi.or/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2011.08.009
[59]	Wu, Z., & Gao, X. (2017). Preschoolers’ Group Bias in Punishing Selfishness in the Ultimatum Game. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 166, 280-292. https://doi.or/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.08.015
[60]	Yamagishi, T., Horita, Y., Mifune, N., Hashimoto, H., Li, Y. et al. (2012). Rejection of Unfair Offers in the Ultimatum Game Is No Evidence of Strong Reciprocity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 20364-20368. https://doi.or/10.1073/pnas.1212126109

Full-Text