摘要
随着社会的不断发展，一些社会问题(或污名)也日益凸现，不仅危及个人生活质量和身心健康，而且对社会稳定、经济发展构成严重威胁，已引起社会哲学、伦理学、社会学、心理学等学科的研究思考和社会的普遍关注。
本研究以Weiner(2000)的责任归因动机序列为理论模型，参考已有归因与责任推断研究成果，根据自编的关于我国当前所存在的社会行为问题(污名)的开放式问卷的调查结果，拟定一些比较典型的社会污名(像艾滋病、吸毒、酗酒、肥胖、虐待、吸烟、抑郁、神经衰弱、近视、沉溺于网络、下岗、婚外情等)；以国内309名大学生为被试，考察不同性别、不同专业学生对所拟定的社会污名的部位和控制性归因、责任判断、情感反应的差异性；探讨相应的归因、责任推断、情感以及行为反应序列；为寻求这些社会行为问题(污名)的应对策略提供有参考价值的实证资料和理论依据。
研究结果表明：
1．在不提供任何控制性信息的情况下，被试认为12种社会污名的起因都偏向于自身和可控，倾向于做出有责任的推断。但这种偏向和倾向程度不一，其中家庭暴力被认为可控性最高，应负最高程度的责任；其次可控性较高和应付较高责任的是吸毒和沉溺于网络，而下岗的可控性与责任相对较低。在情感反应和行为应对策略上，家庭暴力引起被试最高的生气、最低的同情和最低的帮助；其次引起较高生气的是吸毒、婚外情以及酗酒、吸烟。近视、下岗、肥胖和抑郁引起的生气较低，神经衰弱和下岗得到较高的同情和较高的帮助。此外，被试对艾滋病也有较高的同情和较高的帮助。
2．在提供了感染艾滋病的两种不同情景(可控与不可控)信息的情况下，被试更倾向于认为，愈是自身和可以控制的原因，愈有较高的责任，并产生消极的情感反应，同情低，生气高，惩戒高而利他行为低。由此可以看出控制性的显著差异对相应的情感反应和行为应对策略有显著影响。相应的两个行为反应序列为：起因→外界→不可控→较低责任→较低生气类情感反应、较高同情
类情感反应一较低惩戒、较高利他行为；起因一自身一可控一较高责任一较高
生气类情感反应、较低同情类情感反应一较高惩戒、较低利他行为。
3．性别在责任推断、生气、帮助上存在主效应，女生比男生更倾向于做出
有责任的推断，表现出更高的生气，更愿意给予帮助。专业在控制性、责任推
断、同情上具有主效应，理工科学生比文科学生更倾向于认为这些污名是行为
者可以控制的，更倾向于认为行为者应承担较高的责任，对污名拥有者表现出
更高的同情。在艾滋病知识的得分上，性别具有主效应，女生的得分高于男生。
4．两个模型的建立为Weiner的理论假设提供了新的、跨文化的依据，使我
们对归因、责任推断、情感反应以及后续行为应对策略之间的序列和数量化关
系有了新的更为深刻的认识，这些变量之间的关系可概括为：归因的部位、控
制性一责任推断一情感反应（生气和同情）一惩戒或利他行为O
With the development of our society, there were a lot of social stigmas which came into being. These problems have influenced our physical and mental healthy, and threatened the stability of our society and economic development. These topics have elicited a lot of attentions and researches from philosophers, ethicists, socialists and psychologists.
This dissertation found out the typical social stigmas (e.g. AIDS, Drug abuse, Alcoholism, Obesity, family abuse, Smoking, Depression etc.) by open-end questionnaire based on attributional theory and the related researches. 309 participants attended these studies, and the differences of their reactions related with attribution, responsibility, affect, and help giving or punishment were tested. The relationships among these variables were settled.
Results showed:
1. These twelve stigmas were evaluated by participants to be more internal and controllable, and the targets tended to have responsibility. For example, spousal abuse was regarded as high controllable, high responsibility, high angry and low sympathy and help-giving; but unemployment was regarded as having lower responsibility, low anger, and high help-giving.
2. In study two, participants tended to think internal and controllable causes (e.g. got AIDS through frequent causal sex with many women) related with high responsibility, low sympathy and high anger, high punishment and low pro-social behavior; external and uncontrollable causes (e.g. got AIDS through a blood transfusion) related with low responsibility, high sympathy and low anger, low punishment and high pro-social behavior.
3. Three were main effects of gender on responsibility, anger and help giving by , female students more likely make higher responsibility judgment, and showed
more angry and more likely to give help to the target than male students. Three were main effects of major on attribution, responsibility judgment and sympathy, the students from science majors tended to think the reason was more controllable and the target having higher responsibility, and showed more sympathy to the stigmatized target than students from social science majors. In addition, female students had more knowledge related with AIDS than males.
4. Two SEM built by EQS made some cross-culture proves for Weiner's attributional theory of responsibility judgment. The quantities relationships among these variables were more clearly known through these studies. In general, these links could be summarized as:
Attributional locus and controllability → responsibility → affect responses (anger and sympathy) → punishment or pro-social behavior.
引文
1. Heider F. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York; Wiley,1958.
2. Weiner B. An attributional theory of achievement motivition and emotion. Psychological Review,1985,92, 548-573.
3. Weiner B. An attributional theory of motivition and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1986.
4. Weiner B. Human motivition: Metaphors, theories, and research. Newbury Park, DA: Sage,1992.
5. Weiner B, Juvonen J. An attributional analysis of students' Interaction:The social consequences of perceived responsibility. Educational Pschology Review, 1993,5(4):334.
6. Weiner B. On sin versus sickness: A theory of perceived responsibility and social motivition. American Psychologist, 1993,48, 957-965.
7. Weiner B. Judgments of responsibility: A foundation for a theory of social conduct. New York; Guilford,1995.
8. Weiner B. Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Theories of Motivition from an Attributional Perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 2000,12, 1-14.
9. Graham S, Weiner B, & Zucker G. S,. An Attributional Analysis of Punishment Goals and Public Reactions to O. J. Simpson. Personality and Social psychology Bulletin, 1997,23(4):331-346.
10. Burger G. M. Motivitional biases in the attribution of responsibility for an accident: A meta-analysis of the defensive-attribution hypothesis. Psycological Bulletin, 1981,90, 496-512.
11. Russel D, McAuley E. Causal attribution, Causal Dimensions, and affective reactions to success and failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986.
12. Dariusz D. Perpetrator's freedom of choice as a determinant of attribution of
responsibility from the perpspective of the victim and a neutral observer. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 1991,22, 81-90.
13. Graham S, Weiner. B, Giulano. T, & Williams. E(1993). An attributional Analysis of reactions to Magic Johnson. Journal of Applied social psychology, 23, 331-346.
14. Schmidt. G., & Weiner B. An attribution-affect-action theory of motivated behavior: Replications examining help giving. Personality and Social psychology Bulletin, 1988,14,610-621.
15. Ross L. The person and the Situation. New York; Mcgraw-Hill, 1991.
16. Aiqing Z. The regulation of self-efficacy and attributional feedback on motivation. Social Behavior and Personality: An international joumal,2002,30(3):381-388.
17. Aiqing Z, Peilan G, & Fanlian Z. The models of judgments of behavior responsibility in Chinese culture from an attributional perspective. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal,2003,31(2): 205-214.
18．张爱卿．动机论：迈向 21 世纪的动机心理学研究．华中师范大学出版社．1999．
19．韦纳．B．论心理理论的建构和动机归因理论的整合．张爱卿译．华东师范大学学报(教育科学版)，2001，(3)，17-29．
20．林钟敏．从归因理论的角度探讨我国大学生的社会性评价．心理学报，1993，(2)，155-163．
21．林钟敏．责任的心理分析—介绍Weiner．B新著《责任的判断》．心理学动态，1996，4(3)，56-60．
22．林钟敏．大学生对学习行为的责任归因．心理学报，2001，33(1)，37-42．
23．孙煜明．学生考试成功结果的归因分析——归因理论的跨文化研究，[J]心理学报，1991，(2)．
24．孙煜明．动机心理学．南京大学出版社．1993．
25．孙煜明．不同专业大学生学业成败归因特点研究．南京师大学报，1994，(1)
26．孙煜明．考试成败结果的复合原因、情感反应和行为决定．人大复印资料1999．
27．孙煜明．教师评价的方式与归因原理的应用．四川心理科学，1995，2．
28．孙煜明等．动机科学的历史发展 心理学探新，1999．
29．张爱卿．人际责任推断与行为应对策略的归因分析，心理学报，2003，35(2)，231-236．
30．张爱卿．人际责任归因与助人意愿的关系．心理发展与教育，2002，4．
31．刘永芳．经典归因理论的最新发展极其存在的问题．社会心理研究，1995，2．
32．刘永芳、杜秀芳、庄锦英．动机研究的历史演变．山东师大学报，2000，1，54-58．
33．周小虹．现代社会心理学——多维视野中的社会行为研究．[M]上海人民出版社．1997．
34．赵祖平．论下岗职工归因中的自我服务倾向工会理论与实践．2001，15(5)．
35．张敏强．教育与心理统计学．人民教育出版社．1996．
36．王孝玲．教育测量．华东师范大学出版社．2001．
37. Bentler P M. EQS6 Structural Equations Program Manual. Encino. CA: Multivariate Software, 2000,95-98.
38. Bentler P M. EQS6 Structural Equations Program Manual. Los Angeles: BMDP Statistic Software, 1989,86-102.
39．雷蒙德·佩里．教会学生如何取得成功．《加拿大教育》．1999．
40．《世界暴力和健康报告》．http:\\www.sina.com.cn．
41．《2002年世界卫生报告：减少威胁和促进健康生活》