Adaptive Flexibility, Cooperation, and Prosocial Motivations: The Emotional Foundations of Becoming Human

Are monetary gifts negatively labeled? Material benefits and prosocial motivation evaluation

We examined whether people perceive prosocial actors' prosocial motivations differently when prosocial actors gain monetary gifts and goods gifts. Across five studies, 1351 participants read different prosocial scenarios that depicted prosocial actors who gained either monetary or goods gifts. Then, they evaluated the prosocial motivations of the prosocial actors. Studies 1-5 consistently found that people perceived prosocial motivations to be less authentic when prosocial actors chose to receive monetary gifts compared with goods gifts. In addition, moral disgust and moral character evaluation mediated this effect (Studies 3-4). Moreover, the negative effect of monetary gifts on people's perception of prosocial motivation further undermined their helping intention to prosocial actors (Study 5). Our research expanded the understanding of people's perception of material gifts in prosocial behavior by proposing the model of monetary benefits aggravated tainted altruism. Besides, our findings provide insights into public policy and charity rules.

Status Competition and Implicit Coordination: Based on the Role of Knowledge Sharing and Psychological Safety

Implicit coordination is an important research topic in the field of social cognition. Previous studies have studied implicit coordination behavior from the perspective of team mental model but ignored the internal mechanism of individual status competition motivation on implicit coordination behavior. Based on the differences of status competition motivation, the individual status competition motivation is divided into prestige-type and dominant-type. With knowledge sharing as the mediating variable and psychological safety as the moderating variable, this research constructed a process model of the influence of status competition motivation on implicit coordination behavior. The empirical study was carried out with a sample of 367 employees of 44 enterprises. The research results show the following findings: (1) Status competition has a differentiated impact on implicit coordination. Prestige-type status competition has a significant positive impact on implicit coordination behavior, while dominant-type status competition has a significant negative impact on implicit coordination behavior. (2) Knowledge sharing plays a mediating role between status competition (prestige-type status competition and dominant-type status competition) and implicit coordination. (3) Psychological safety positively moderates the relationship between prestige-type status competition, dominant-type status competition, and knowledge sharing. The research results provide a new perspective for the field of implicit coordination; reveal the mechanism of status competition motivation in implicit coordination, which is of great significance to the practice of enterprise team management and human resource management.