|
|
|
| Motivation and behavior across screens： Generation Z’s cognition of public and private domains and social participation in the digital era |
| LIU Huimin, LIU Haiyan, LONG Jiacheng, FU Qingyu, HE Jiaxuan |
| School of Psychology, Hainan Normal University, Hainan Provincial Research Center for Adolescent Psychological Development and Education, Haikou 571158 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Embodied cognition theory posits that cognition, motivation, and behavior are closely linked to bodily experiences. Based on this theoretical framework, the present study conducted three progressive experiments to examine Generation Z's attitudes toward the distinction between public and private domains, as well as the impact of online environments on their public service motivation and voice behavior. Study 1 employed the Semantic Misattribution Procedure with 81 valid participants. The results indicated that, in judgments of public and private domains, concrete words exhibited a significantly stronger priming effect on public domain cognition than abstract words. This finding suggests that in implicit attitudes, concrete words associated with physical contexts are more effective in activating public domain cognition than abstract words linked to online contexts. Study 2 measured public service motivation under four priming conditions： online public domain, online private domain, offline public domain, and offline private domain, with a total of 345 valid responses. The results demonstrated that public service motivation scores were significantly higher in the online public domain condition than in the online private domain condition, while scores in the offline private domain condition were significantly higher than those in the online private domain condition. This indicates that embodied perception in offline contexts more effectively enhances individuals' public service motivation. Study 3 extended the priming conditions of Study 2 to assess voice behavior among Generation Z. The results revealed significant differences in voice behavior scores across the four conditions, specifically： offline public domain > online public domain > offline private domain > online private domain. These findings suggest that embodied perception in offline contexts significantly facilitates the expression of voice behavior. Overall, this study highlights the activation effects of embodiment on cognition, motivation, and behavior. While digital environments have expanded the scope of public and private domains, embodiment in offline contexts remains the core mechanism driving the activation of cognition, motivation, and behavior.
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 包元杰, 李超平. (2016). 公共服务动机的测量:理论结构与量表修订.中国人力资源开发, (07),83-91.
[2] 蔡新元, 陶梦楚, 张健, 许艳闰. (2023). 信息呈现方式对学习效果的影响: 虚拟教师拟真度的调节作用.图书情报知识, 40(2), 20-28.
[3] 陈莉, 高铭竺. (2020). “00后” 大学生的群体特点及意识形态形成环境研究.西部学刊, (12),19-21.
[4] 陈长松. (2009). 论网络空间公共领域,私人领域的融合及影响.学术论坛, (11), 156-159.
[5] 段锦云, 张倩. (2012). 建言行为的认知影响因素、理论基础及发生机制.心理科学进展, 20(01), 115-126.
[6] 李晓培. (2021). 数字化生存与自我身份认同.岭南学刊,(06), 124-128.
[7] 秦树理. (2007). 自愿服务:培养大学生公共精神的重要途径.中州学刊, (05), 137-138.
[8] 王晓升. (2011). “公共领域” 概念辨析. 吉林大学社会科学学报, 51(04), 22-30, 159.
[9] 胥彦, 李超平. (2020). 人口统计学特征对公共服务动机有什么影响?来自元分析的证据.心理科学进展, 28(10), 1631-1649.
[10] 徐琳, 李紫薇. (2023). 国家治理现代化视域下网络公共领域的形塑与理性成长.理论月刊, (10), 57-66.
[11] 姚琦, 马华维, 阎欢, 陈琦. (2014). 心理学视角下社交网络用户个体行为分析.心理科学进展, 22(10), 1647-1659.
[12] 张良驯, 郭元凯. (2020). 青年政治认同与政治参与研究.人民论坛, (24), 76-79.
[13] 张振刚, 余传鹏, 李云健. (2016). 主动性人格、知识分享与员工创新行为关系研究.管理评论, 28(04), 123-133.
[14] Alač, M. (2005). Widening the wideware： an analysis of multimodal interaction in scientific practice. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol. 27, No. 27).
[15] Bright, L. (2008). Does public service motivation really make a difference on the job satisfaction and turnover intentions of public employees? The American Review of Public Administration, 38(2), 149-166.
[16] Cattell,A. (2009). Grown up digital-How the net generation is changing your world.Industrial and Commercial Training, 41(2), 106-107.
[17] Christie, C., & Dill, E. (2016). Evaluating peers in cyberspace: The impact of anonymity.Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 292-299.
[18] Cojuharenco I., Cornelissen,G.,& Karelaia N. (2016). ‘Yes,we can！’ Self-construal, perceived ability to make a difference,and socially responsible behavior.Journal of Environmental Psychology, 48, 75-86.
[19] Dahlgren, P. (2005). The internet, public spheres,and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation.Political Communication, 22(2), 147-152.
[20] Dyne L. V., Ang S., & Botero I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs.Journal of Management Studies,40(6), 1359-1392.
[21] Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams.Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
[22] Fazio R. H.(2014). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. In Attitude strength(pp. 247-282). Psychology Press.
[23] Gangopadhyay, N., & Pichler, A. (2024). Embodiment and agency in a digital world. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1392949.
[24] Gelb A., Mittal N., & Mukherjee A. (2019). Towards real-time governance: Using digital feedback to improve.Center for Global Development. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/towards-real-time-governance-using-digital-feedback-improve-service-voice.
[25] Granovetter,M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties.American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
[26] Hällgren, C., & Björk, A. (2022). Young people’s identities in digital worlds.The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 40(1), 49-61.
[27] Han, Q., & Xia, L. (2020). Social media use and employee innovative behavior: The mediating role of employee voice.Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 48(3), 1-7.
[28] Hansson, M. G. (2007). The private sphere: An emotional territory and its agent (Vol. 15). Springer Science & Business Media.
[29] Karakiza, M. (2015). The impact of social media in the public sector.Procedia-social and Behavioral Sciences, 175, 384-392.
[30] Low, S. M. (2003). Anthropological theories of body, space, and culture.Space and Culture, 6(1), 9-18.
[31] Mulyono B., Affandi I., Suryadi K., & Darmawan C. (2022). Online civic engagement: Fostering citizen engagement through social media.Jurnal Civics: Media Kajian Kewarganegaraan, 19(1), 75-85.
[32] Perry J. L.,Hondeghem,A.,& Wise L. R. (2010). Revisiting the motivational bases of public service: Twenty years of research and an agenda for the future.Public Administration Review, 70, 681-690.
[33] Premeaux, S. R., & Bedeian,A. G. (2003). Breaking the silence: The moderating effects of self-monitoring in predicting speaking up in the workplace.Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(3), 194-208.
[34] Prensky, M. (2005). Digital natives, digital immigrants.Gifted(135), 29-31.
[35] Purnama, D. H., & Arianti, Y. (2024). Construction and deconstruction of self-identity of Palembang adolescents on Instagram.Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 18(8), e05295-e05295.
[36] Reeves,B.,& Nass,C. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television,and new media like real people and places Stanford University Press How people treat computers, television,and new media like real people and places. Stanford University Press.
[37] Robles-Carrillo, M. (2024). Digital identity: An approach to its nature, concept, and functionalities. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 32(1), eaae019.
[38] Sava F. A.,Maricuţoiu L. P.,Rusu S., Macsinga I., Vîrgă D.,Cheng C.-M., & Payne B. K. (2012). An inkblot for the implicit assessment of personality: The semantic misattribution procedure.European Journal of Personality, 26(6), 613-628.
[39] Schiano Lomoriello A., Meconi F., Rinaldi I., & Sessa P. (2018). Out of sight out of mind: Perceived physical distance between the observer and someone in pain shapes observer’s neural empathic reactions.Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1824.
[40] Shapiro, L. (2019). Embodied cognition. Routledge.
[41] Smith, E. R., & Semin, G. R. (2004). Socially situated cognition: Cognition in its social context.Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 57-121.
[42] Srirahayu D. P., Ekowati D., & Sridadi A. R. (2023). Innovative work behavior in public organizations: A systematic literature review.Heliyon, 9(2), e13557.
[43] Starbuck,C. R. (2016). Managing insidious barriers to upward communication in organizations: An empirical investigation of relationships among implicit voice theories,power distance orientation,self-efficacy,and leader-directed voice. Regent University.
[44] Thuy, N. T. T., & Phinaitrup, B.-A. (2023). The effect of public service motivation on job performance of public servants in Vietnam: The role of mediation of job satisfaction and person-organization fit.International Journal of Public Administration, 46(5), 326-343.
[45] Tyler, T., & Blader, S. (2013). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity,and behavioral engagement. Routledge.
[46] Vuori, V., & Okkonen, J. (2012). Knowledge sharing motivational factors of using an intra-organizational social media platform.Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(4), 592-603.
[47] West, W. C., & Holcomb, P. J. (2000). Imaginal, semantic, and surface-level processing of concrete and abstract words: An electrophysiological investigation.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(6), 1024-1037.
[48] Zhang, Y., & Liu, X. (2024). How does a focusing event shape public opinion? Natural experimental evidence from the Orlando mass shooting. Policy Studies Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12543.
[49] Zimbardo, P. G. (1969). The human choice: Individuation,reason,and order versus deindividuation,impulse,and chaos.Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 17, 237-307. |
|
|
|
