【作者】 吴媛红；

【导师】 陈明亮；

【作者基本信息】 浙江大学 ， 管理科学与工程， 2012， 硕士

【副题名】基于最后通牒博弈和独裁者博弈范式的ERP研究

【摘要】 惩罚机制下的公平研究一直是社会学、心理学、管理学领域研究的热点。目前,大量惩罚机制下公平感知的研究对象主要集中在被动接受提议的决策者,而非掌握主导作用,提出权利分配的决策者,即利益分配者。因此,对于利益分配者在不同惩罚机制下的公平感知活动研究就更具有价值。而本文就是关注有惩罚和无惩罚机制下,利益分配者的公平感知差异。传统的研究大部分借助行为实验和问卷调查的方法。其中,最后通牒博弈和独裁者博弈常常被运用于研究惩罚机制和公平感知的行为实验中,但此类实验并不能深入到心理层面甚至是生理层面,来寻求进一步的证据。随着认知神经科学的发展,特别是神经科学技术如事件相关电位(ERP)等方法的成熟发展,人们拥有逐渐打开“大脑”黑箱的能力。运用ERP技术,人们挖掘惩罚机制下利益分配者公平感知的脑区特征和神经活动,更好地揭示了现象后面的本质。本研究运用最后通牒博弈和独裁者博弈的情境,借助ERP技术,探索利益分配者(学生被试)在不同惩罚机制下的不同行为选择和公平准则背后的神经机制差异。同时,本研究通过对学生样本和社会人群样本进行问卷调研,对实验样本的公平感知水平进行了定性研究。结合行为数据、脑电数据和问卷调查,本研究得出两个结论和一个推论：结论一：与有惩罚相比,无惩罚情形下,利益分配者更加倾向于给出利己的不公平分配方案。表现在行为数据上,无惩罚情境相对于有惩罚情境,不公平的选择比例更高,不公平的程度更大,响应时更短。结论二：不论有无惩罚机制,分配方案不公平程度越高,利益分配者内疚感(一种冲突)越强。表现在ERP成分上,不公平分配方案诱发比公平分配方案诱发振幅更大的N400-like(广义的N400,反映冲突的一种ERP成分)；绝对不公平分配方案比相对不公平分配方案诱发振幅更大的N400-like;相对不公平分配方案比公平分配方案诱发振幅更大的N400-like.推论一：无论有无惩罚机制,具有较高公平感知的利益分配者,对于不公平的分配方案,有较强的内疚感。这些结果的意义和创新点在于：(1)从行为数据和脑电数据的角度,验证了经济学关于“理性人”和“有限理性”的假设。(2)运用ERP手段研究利益分配者的公平感知,并验证了“内疚感”的存在,这说明“道德机制”能够在经济活动中发挥作用。更多还原

【Abstract】 Fairness studying under the punishment mechanism has always been the focus in the research field of sociology, psychology and management. Currently, the research object of fairness perceptive under the punishment mechanism has been concentrated on decision-makers who accept proposal passively (also known as the responder), rather than the decision-makers who master the power allocation (also known as the proposer). Therefore, it is more valuable to do the research on the distributor of benifits. The emphasis of this study is focused on fairness perceptive problem of the distributor of benifits under the punishment and no-punishment mechanism.Over the years, scholars have carried out the research mainly through behavioral experiments and survey research. Among them, the ultimatum game (UG) and the dictator game (DG) has often been used in the study of behavior experiments on the fairness perceptive and punishment mechanism. However, for seeking further evidence, behavioral experiments can not be penetrated into people’s psychological level, and even physical level. With the development of cognitive neuroscience, particularly in neuroscience techniques, such as event-related potentials (ERP), people have gradually mastered the capabilities for opening the "brain" black-box. Using of ERP technology, people can dig the brain characteristics and nerve activity of fairness perceptive of decision-makers under the punishment mechanism, and can reveal the nature behind the phenomenon mere efficiently.This study uses the ultimatum game (UG) and dictator game (DG) as its situation. And with the event-related potentials (ERP) technique, it studies on both the different behavior selection for distributor of benefits (student paticipatants) under the different punishment mechanism and the differences among neural mechanism behind the fairness criterion. At the same time, we make a quantitative study on the level of fairness perception of the sample through questionnaire survey on the samples of students and society. Based on the behavioral data, EEG data and questionnaire survey, the conclusions and inference of this study are as follows: Conclusion1:Compared with the punishment case, the distributiors of benefits are more likely to make the selfish unfair solutions under the no punishment case. The behavioral date shows that, under no punishument case, unfair solutions are make more frequently, strongly, firmly(shorter response time).Conclusion2:No matter what punishemet mechanism, more unfair of the distributon, more guilty (a conflict) the distributor of benefits is. It can been reflecting on the ERP components:compared to the unfair solution, fair solution can stimulate a more negative N400-like component (generalized but not the typical semantic N400, a component which can reflect the conflicts); compared to the relatively unfair solutions, absolutiely unfair solutions can stimulate a more negative N400-like component; compared to the fair solutions, relatively unfair solutions can stimulate a more negative N400-like component.Inference1:No matter what punishemet mechanism, the distributors of benefits who has a higher level of fairness perception, are more guilty when making the unfair solution.The meaning and innovation points of these results are:(1) From the behavioral date and EEG date, this study verifies the "economic man" and "limited rationality" hypothesis.(2) Prove the existence of "guilt" the the ERP study on the fairness perception of distributor of benefits, and show that the "moral mechanim" can play the role in economic activity.更多还原