【作者】 张璇；

【导师】 伍麟；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 科学技术哲学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 在现实生活中，民以食为天，食以安为先。食品安全问题，不仅关系到人类的生存和健康，而且还关系到经济的繁荣和国家的和谐与稳定。近年来，食品安全事件的频繁发生，不仅损害了消费者的身体健康，还极大地影响了食品行业的发展，导致了人们对食品安全的不信任，对政府食品安全管理的不信任。在学术界，目前，国内食品安全管理中的信任研究主要是在宏观的现象层面、态度层面以及制度层面展开的，很少有研究者从微观的心理学领域展开研究。然而，心理学研究表明，在当今全球化的风险社会中，公众对于食品安全问题的评价（主观的风险感知）与管理者、工业家、专家（技术性的风险评估）有着很大的差异，导致了二者之间不可调和的矛盾。Wynne等研究者认为，解决这种矛盾的关键是加强公众对食品安全管理的信任。由此我们可以看出，食品安全管理中的信任研究具有十分重要的现实意义和理论意义。在风险社会中，信任的心理学研究发现，公众主要采用主观的风险感知去评价食品安全问题，因此倾向于信任与他们有相似价值观的管理者；而专家采用的是技术性的风险评估，因此倾向于通过对风险行为的理性计算去指导可靠性评价。很明显，这里展现了两种类型的信任：一种基于与他人之间的关系，另一种基于对过去行为或记录的评价，即关系的信任和计算的信任。由此我们可以看出，信任有不同的维度。Earle等研究者从理论上提出，信任分为关系的信任和计算的信任，关系的信任基于群体成员关系和共享的价值观，它没有客观的、准确的标准，只要存在价值观相似性，个体就会表现出这种信任，因此关系的信任是对称的，即消息事件降低信任的程度和积极事件提高信任的程度差异不显著；计算的信任基于过去的行为表现，有客观的行为标准，只要现实情况与标准不符，就会立即破坏这种信任，因此计算的信任是不对称的，即消极事件降低信任的程度强于积极事件提高信任的程度。由此我们可以看出，不同的信任维度表现出不同的对称性和不对称性。此外，信任是一种风险决策。由于人的认知能力有限，是“有限理性”的个体，为了减少认知上的复杂性，人们在进行风险决策的时候往往采用启发式策略。因此，信任判断也往往采用启发式策略。信任有其认知和情感基础，对人和事物的情感反应是可靠性判断的启发式线索；同时，认知的信任是由知识来推动的，而知识来自于对信托者行为或名声的观察，即知识是获得性的。因此，信任会受到情感启发式的影响，也会受到获得性启发式的影响。关系的信任基于信任者与他人之间的关系，主要与目的、意图有关，如价值观相似性和积极情感，这说明关系的信任受到情感启发式的影响；计算的信任基于他人过去的行为，如行为记录和名声，这说明计算的信任受到获得性启发式的影响。由此我们可以看出，不同信任维度表现出不同的对称性或不对称性机制，可能是由于它们采用的启发式不同。本文希望通过实证的方法来证明这些观点在食品安全管理中的合理性。目前，在食品安全领域，人们关注的焦点和研究者的研究重点都集中于食品生物技术，如食品添加剂、农药和转基因食品等，因此，本文针对性地对这三方面进行了考察。综上，本文实施了三个研究。研究1探索了食品安全管理中信任的心理结构。通过探索性因子分析和验证性因子分析，本研究得出，在食品安全管理中，信任包括两个维度：关系的信任和计算的信任。然而，在三个具体的食品安全问题上，信任的结构有所不同。在食品添加剂和农药领域中，信任包括关系的信任、政府行为感知和熟悉性；在转基因食品领域中，信任包括关系的信任、政府行为感知和政府行为品质。研究2探索了食品安全管理中不同信任维度的对称性和不对称性机制。通过方差分析，本研究得出，在食品安全管理中，关系的信任表现出对称性，计算的信任表现出不对称性。具体而言，在食品添加剂和农药领域中，关系的信任表现出对称性，政府行为感知和熟悉性表现出不对称性；在转基因食品领域中，关系的信任和政府行为品质表现出对称性，政府行为感知表现出不对称性。研究3验证了启发式是否是导致不同信任维度表现出对称性和不对称性机制的原因。结构方程模型的分析得出，数据与模型的拟合状况良好。也即是，关系的信任是由情感启发式启动的，因此表现出对称性；计算的信任是由获得性启发式启动的，因此表现出不对称性。具体而言，回归系数的结果显示，在食品安全管理中，情感启发式能显著地影响关系的信任，获得性启发式不能显著地影响计算的信任；在食品添加剂领域中，情感启发式能显著地影响关系的信任，获得性启发式能显著地影响政府行为感知；在农药领域中，情感启发式不能显著地影响关系的信任，但获得性启发式能显著地影响政府行为感知；在转基因食品领域中，情感启发式能显著地影响关系的信任，获得性启发式能显著地影响政府行为感知。更多还原

【Abstract】 In real society, Food is the paramount necessity of people; safety is the primarycondition of food. The problems in the field of food safety not only refer to people’ssurvival and health, but also touch on the prosperity of economy and the stability ofthe country. In recent years, frequent food safety incidents have not only harmedconsumers’ health, but also done great impact on the development of the food industry,resulting in distrust in the food safety, and in the food safety management. Inacademia, at present, the researches on trust in domestic food safety management arecarried out mostly at the macro phenomenal level, the attitudinal level and theinstitutional level. Few experts make micro psychological researches in this field.However, the results of psychological researches indicate that, in globalism risksociety, public evaluation on food safety (subjective risk perception) is very differentfrom managers’, industrialists’ and experts’(objective technical risk evaluation). Itleads to irreconcilable conflict between them. Wynne et al. suggested that, the keypoint to solve this conflict is to improve public trust in food safety management. Thus,researches on food safety management have important theoretical and practicalsignificance.In psychological researches on trust in risk society, researchers found that, publicadopt subjective risk perception to estimate food safety, so they tend to trust themanagers who have similar values with them; while experts adopt objective technicalrisk evaluation, so they tend to rationally analyze risk behaviors to direct reliabilityevaluation. Obviously, here display two kinds of trust: one is based on therelationships with others; the other is based on past performance or records. That isrelational trust and calculative trust. Thus, trust has different dimensions. Earle et al.theoretically proposed that, trust includes relational trust and calculative trust. The former is based on the relationship among group members and shared value; it doesn’thave objective and exact standards. As long as there is similar value in interpersonalrelationship, trustor will perform this kind of trust. Thus, relational trust is symmetry.The latter is based on past performance; it has objective behavioral criteria, once realsituation doesn’t match this criteria, trust between both sides will be damagedimmediately. Thus, calculative trust is asymmetry. Therefore, different dimensions oftrust perform different symmetry and asymmetry. Moreover, trust is a kind of riskdecision. Because of limited cognitive abilities or bounded rationality, to reducecognitive complications, people always adopt heuristic strategies when they aremaking risk decisions. Thus, trust judgment also adopts heuristic strategies. Trust hasaffective and cognitive base. Emotional responses to persons and objects are heuristicclues in the judgment of reliability. At the same time, cognitive trust is promoted byknowledge, and knowledge comes from observations upon trustees’ behaviors orreputations, so knowledge is available. Thus, trust can be influenced by affective andavailability heuristic. Relational trust is based on the relationship between trustors andothers; it is related to purposes and intentions, such as similar value and positiveemotion. It indicates that relational trust will be influenced by affective heuristic.Calculative trust is based on others’ past behaviors, such as performance records andreputations. It indicates that calculative trust will be influenced by availabilityheuristic. Therefore, that different dimensions of trust perform different symmetry andasymmetry mechanism result from that they adopt different heuristics. In this paper,we hope to prove these ideas by empirical methods in the field of food safetymanagement. Currently, in the field of food safety, public concerns and experts’research priorities all focus on biological technologies, such as food additives,pesticides and genetically modified food. Thus, this paper pointedly investigates thethree aspects.In conclusion, this paper carries out three experiments. Research1explores thepsychological structure of trust in food safety management. By Exploratory FactorAnalysis and Confirmatory Factor Analysis, we have proved that, in the field of foodsafety, trust consists of two dimensions: rational trust and calculative trust. However, in there specific food safety problems, the structures of trust are different. In foodadditives and pesticides, trust includes relational trust, government performanceperception and familiarity. In genetically modified food, trust includes relational trust,government performance perception and government performance trait. Research2explores the symmetry and asymmetry mechanism of trust in food safety management.By factorial design ANOVA, it has indicated that, in the field of food safety, relationaltrust is symmetry; calculative trust is asymmetry. Specificly, in food additives andpesticides, relational trust is symmetry; government performance and familiarity areasymmetry. In genetically modified food, relational trust and government performancetrait are symmetry; government performance is asymmetry. Research3verifies ifheuristic is the reason leading to symmetry and asymmetry. By Structural EquationModel, we have revealed that, the data perfectly matchs our hypothetical mode. Thatis to say, relational trust is activated by affective heuristic, so it is symmetry;calculative trust is done by availability heuristic, so it is asymmetry. Specificly,regression coefficients show that, in food safety management, affective heuristicsignificantly influences relational trust; however availability heuristic could notsignificantly influence calculative trust. In food additives, affective heuristicsignificantly influences relational trust; availability heuristic significantly influencesgovernment performance perception. In pesticides, affective heuristic could notsignificantly influence relational trust; but availability heuristic could significantlyinfluence government performance perception. In pesticides, affective heuristicsignificantly influences relational trust; availability heuristic significantly influencesgovernment performance perception.更多还原