Desarrollo, validación y evidencias experimentales de un diccionario de prosocialidad

Leidy Johanna Rojas Landinez; Iván Felipe Medina-Arboleda; David Ricardo Aguilar-Pardo; Diana Camila Garzón-Velandia

doi:10.22235/cp.v19i2.4356

Autores

Leidy Johanna Rojas Landinez Catholic University of Colombia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3131-7516
Iván Felipe Medina-Arboleda Catholic University of Colombia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3209-9204
David Ricardo Aguilar-Pardo Catholic University of Colombia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2197-1346
Diana Camila Garzón-Velandia Catholic University of Colombia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9561-5021

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22235/cp.v19i2.4356

Palavras-chave:

jogo de bens públicos, análise linguística, LIWC, cooperação

Resumo

A presença de grandes bases de dados textuais permite a análise automatizada de construtos psicológicos. Para isso, foram desenvolvidos programas que categorizam palavras e identificam, entre outros, estilos cognitivos, linguísticos ou conteúdo emocional. Este trabalho é composto por dois estudos que apresentam evidências de validade de conteúdo e de validade externa de um dicionário destinado a avaliar a pró-socialidade, compatível com o software LIWC. O Estudo 1 partiu de um corpus de termos extraídos de fontes naturais e especializadas, avaliados por sete juízes, resultando em uma lista definitiva. No Estudo 2, utilizou-se um jogo de bens públicos no qual 160 participantes enfrentaram um dilema entre interesse próprio e bem-estar coletivo. Adicionalmente, os participantes responderam por escrito qual estratégia haviam utilizado no jogo e quais emoções experimentaram. Essas respostas foram analisadas com o dicionário construído no Estudo 1. Evidenciou-se que a pró-socialidade, medida pelo dicionário, relacionou-se positivamente com o comportamento cooperativo no jogo. Verificou-se também que o estilo cognitivo tipo II prediz o comportamento pró-social no jogo. Os dois estudos mostram a utilidade do dicionário para avaliar a pró-socialidade por meio da análise linguística e a possibilidade de ser usado para estimar esse construto em diferentes contextos.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Referências

Alencar, A. I., de Oliveira Siqueira, J., & Yamamoto, M. E. (2008). Does group size matter? Cheating and cooperation in Brazilian school children. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29(1), 42-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.09.001

Bago, B., Bonnefon, J. F., & De Neys, W. (2021). Intuition rather than deliberation determines selfish and prosocial choices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150(6), 1081-1094. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000968

Bailey, D. H., Winegard, B., Oxford, J., & Geary, D. C. (2012). Sex differences in in-group cooperation vary dynamically with competitive conditions and outcomes. Evolutionary Psychology, 10(1), 102-119. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470491201000112

Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge University Press.

Boyd, R., & Pennebaker, J. (2015). Did Shakespeare write double falsehood? Identifying individuals by creating psychological signatures with text analysis. Psychological Science, 25(5), 570-582. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614566658

Brandt, H., Hauert, C., & Sigmund, K. (2005). Punishing and abstaining for public goods. PNAS, 103(2), 495-497. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507229103

Burton-Chellew, M., Mouden, C., & West, S. (2016). Conditional cooperation and confusion in public-goods experiments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 113(5), 1291-1296. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1509740113

Capraro, V., & Cococcioni, G. (2016). Rethinking spontaneous giving: Extreme time pressure and ego-depletion favor self-regarding reactions. Nature, 6. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep27219

Castiblanco, P. T. (2018). Estilo y contenido lingüístico de conversaciones en Twitter ® durante un proceso de transición a la paz [Tesis de maestría]. Universidad Católica de Colombia. https://repository.ucatolica.edu.co/bitstream/10983/19060/2/RAE.pdf

Catola, M., D’Alessandro, S., Guarnieri, P., & Pizziol, V. (2023). Multilevel public goods game: Levelling up, substitution and crowding-in effects. Journal of Economic Psychology, 97, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2023.102626

Cerdas, D., Núñez, E., & Rojas, M. (2017). Uso del modelo de Rasch para la construcción de tablas de especificaciones: Propuesta metodológica aplicada a una prueba de selección universitaria. Revista Electrónica Actualidades Investigativas en Educación, 17(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.15517/aie.v17i1.27299

Cone, J., & Rand, D. (2014). Time pressure increases cooperation in competitively framed social dilemmas. Plos one, 9(12). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115756

Conway-Smith, B., & West, R. L. (2023). Clarifying system 1 & 2 through the Common Model of Cognition. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.10654

Donohue, W. A., Liang, Y., & Druckman, D. (2014). Validating LIWC Dictionaries: The Oslo I Accords. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33(3), 282-301. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X13512485

Evans, J. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(3), 255-278. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629

Evans, J., & Stanovich, K. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 223-241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612460685

Fischbacher, U., & Gächter, S. (2010). Social preferences, beliefs, and the dynamics of Free riding in public goods experiments. American Economic Review, 100(1), 541-556. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.1.541

Frimer, J. A., Aquino, K., Gebauer, J. E., Zhu, L., & Oakes, H. (2015). A decline in prosocial language helps explain public disapproval of the US Congress. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(21), 6591-6594. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1500355112

Garzón-Velandia, D. C., Barreto, I., & Medina-Arboleda, I. F. (2020). Validación de un diccionario de LIWC para identificar emociones intergrupales. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 52, 149-159. https://doi.org/10.14349/rlp.2020.v52.15

Goeschl, T., & Lohse, J. (2016). Cooperation in public good games. Calculated or confused? European Economic Review, 107, 185-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2018.05.007

Grayson, S., Feinberg, M., Willer, R., & Zaki, J. (2025). Ironic effects of prosocial gossip in driving inaccurate social perceptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2024.104682

Grehl, S., & Tutić, A. (2022). Intuition, reflection, and prosociality: Evidence from a field experiment. Plos one, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262476

Hayes, S. C., & Sanford, B. T. (2014). Cooperation came first: Evolution and human cognition. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 101(1), 112-129. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.64

Hawkins, R. C. II, & Boyd, R. L. (2017). Such stuff as dreams are made on: Dream language, LIWC norms, and personality correlates. Dreaming, 27(2), 102-121. https://doi.org/10.1037/drm0000049

Hou, C., Li, S., Shi, H., & Liu, Z. (2024). The influence of social exclusion on prosocial behavior of college students: the role of relational need threat and regulatory focus. Frontiers in Psychology, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1384279

Ilhan, M. (2016). A comparison of the results of many facet Rasch analyses based on crossed and judge pair designs. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16(2), 579-601. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.2.0390

Inglés, J., Martínez, A. E., Valle, A., García, J., & Ruiz, C. (2011). Conducta prosocial y motivación académica en estudiantes españoles de Educación Secundaria Obligatoria. Universitas Psicológica, 10(2), 451-466. https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.upsy10-2.cpma

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.

Lee, C. H., Kim, K., Seo, Y. S., & Chung, C. K. (2007). The relations between personality and language use. Journal of General Psychology, 134(4), 405-413. https://doi.org/10.3200/GENP.134.4.405-414

Li, S., Du, C., Li, X., Shen, C., & Shi, L. (2024). Antisocial peer exclusion does not eliminate the effectiveness of prosocial peer exclusion in structured populations. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2023.111665

LIWC INC. (2022). LIWC. https://www.liwc.app/help/howitworks

Logan, M., & Hall, M. (2019). Comparing crime types: a linguistic analysis of communiqués associated with the animal and earth liberation movement. Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict, 12(2), 164-181. https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1613554

Luengo Kanacri, B. P., Eisenberg, N., Tramontano, C., Zuffiano, A., Caprara, M. G., Regner, E., Zhu, L., Pastorelli, C., & Caprara, G. V. (2021). Measuring prosocial behaviors: Psychometric properties and cross-national validation of the prosociality scale in five countries. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.693174

Marín-Escobar, J. C., Marín-Benítez, A. C., Maury-Mena, S. C., Guerrero, C. M., & Maury, A. (2024). La prosocialidad: estrategia de educación integral frente a la violencia. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Niñez y Juventud, 22(1), 120-143. https://doi.org/10.11600/rlcsnj.22.1.5681

Markowitz, D., & Hancock, J. (2017). The 27 club: Music lyrics reflect psychological distress. Communication Reports, 30(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215.2016.1210663

Martí-Vilar, M., Merino-Soto, C., & Rodriguez, L. M. (2020). Measurement invariance of the prosocial behavior scale in three Hispanic countries (Argentina, Spain, and Peru). Frontiers in Psychology, 11(29). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00029

Martínez-González, A. E., Inglés Saura, C., Piqueras Rodríguez, J. A., & Oblitas Guadalupe, L. A. (2010). Papel de la conducta prosocial y de las relaciones sociales en el bienestar psíquico y físico del adolescente. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 28(1), 74-84.

Martinsson, P., Myrseth, K. O. R., & Wollbrant, C. (2014). Social dilemmas: When self-control benefits cooperation. Journal of Economic Psychology, 45, 213-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2014.09.004

Montero, I., & León, O. G. (2007). A guide for naming research studies in Psychology. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 7(3), 847-862. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/337/33770318.pdf

Myrseth, K. O. R., Riener, G., & Wollbrant, C. E. (2015). Tangible temptation in the social dilemma: Cash, cooperation, and self-control. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics, 8(2), 61-77. https://doi.org/10.1037/npe0000035

Otten, K., Frey, U. J., Buskens, V., Przepiorka, W., & Ellemers, N. (2022). Human cooperation in changing groups in a large-scale public goods game. Nature Communications, 13(1), 6399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-34160-5

Overduin , J. (2015). Online interventions in consumer conflicts [Tesis de maestría]. Universidad de Twente.

Pennebaker, J. W., Chung, C., Frazee, J., Lavergne, G., & Beaver, D. (2014). When small words foretell academic success: The case of college admissions essays. Plos one, 9(12). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115

Pennebaker, J. W., Francis, M. E., & Booth, R. J. (2001). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC 2001. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. G. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, Our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 547-577. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041

Quiroga-Rojas, A. T., Ardila-Cubillos, D. C., Rojas, D., Monroy, C., Mendoza, A., Manrique, V., Montoya, S., & Sarmiento, L. (2020). Bases cognitivas subyacentes al altruismo en adolescentes y adultos jóvenes. En I. F. Medina-Arboleda, I. Barreto, D. R. Aguilar-Pardo, & M. C. Sandoval-Escobar (Eds.), Perspectivas y contextos de la prosocialidad (pp. 177-195). Editorial Universidad Católica de Colombia & Konrad Lorenz Editores. https://doi.org/10.14718/9789585133471.2020

Ramírez-Esparza, N., Pennebaker, J., García, A., & Suriá, R. (2007). La psicología del uso de las palabras: Un programa de computadora que analiza textos en español. Revista Mexicana de Psicología, 24(1), 85-99.

Rand, D. G., & Epstein, Z. G. (2014). Risking your life without a second thought: Intuitive decision-making and extreme altruism. PLOS One, 9(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0109687

Rand, D., Greene, J., & Nowak, M. (2012). Spontaneous giving and calculated greed. Nature, 489, 427-430. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11467

Rand, D. G., & Nowak, M. A. (2013). Human cooperation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(8), 413-425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.06.003

Rostovtseva, V., Weissing, F., Mezentseva, A., & Butovskaya, A. (2020). Sex differences in cooperativeness—An experiment with Buryats in Southern Siberia. PLOS One, 15(9). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239129

Rude, S. S., Gortner, E.-M., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2004). Language use of depressed and depression-vulnerable college students. Cognition and Emotion, 18(8), 1121-1133. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930441000030

Simpson, B., & Willer, R. (2015). Beyond altruism: Sociological foundations of cooperation and prosocial behavior. Annual Review of Sociology, 41(1), 43-63. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073014-112242

Spinrad, T. L., & Eisenberg, N. (2014). Empathy, prosocial behavior, and positive development in schools. In M. J. Furlong, R. Gilman, & E. S. Huebner (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology in schools [2nd ed.] (pp. 82-98). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Skatova, A., & Ferguson, E. L. (2013). Individual differences in behavioral inhibition explain free riding in public good games when punishment is expected but not implemented. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 9, 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/1744-9081-9-3

Struwe, N., Blanco, E., & Walker, J. M. (2024). Increasing benefits in one-time public goods does not promote cooperation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(41). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2410326121

Teoh, Y. Y., & Hutcherson, C. A. (2022). The games we play: Prosocial choices under time pressure reflect context-sensitive information priorities. Psychological Science, 33(9), 1541-1556. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976221094782

Toro, R., Barreto-Zambrano, M. L., Garzón-Velandia, D. C., Sandoval-Escobar, M., Pineda-Marín, C., O’Sullivan, C., Taylor, L., Kerezsy-Morales, G. K., Giraldo-Puerto, M. A., Cárdenas-Ruiz, S., Ramírez-Sierra, Y. V., Alfonso, D., Duarte, J. V., & Niño Amézquita, J. L. (2023). Empatía, agresividad y perdón en contextos de vulnerabilidad, hostilidad y seguridad en niños y adolescentes. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 55, 18-28. https://doi.org/10.14349/rlp.2023.v55.3

Unesco. (2010). Compendio de los Manuales del SERCE. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000191940

van Hoorn, J., Van Dijk, E., Meuwese, R., Rieffe, C., & Crone, E. A. (2014). Peer influence on prosocial behavior in adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 26(1), 90-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12173

Veloso, C., Muñoz, N., Palza, A. L., Roa, C., Tapia, C., & Lee, S. L. (2015). Asociación de inteligencia emocional, satisfacción vital con conducta prosocial en jóvenes escolarizados de la XV región. LÍMITE Revista Interdisciplinaria de Filosofía y Psicología, 10(34). https://revistalimite.uta.cl/index.php/limite/article/view/49

Zasiekin, S., Kuperman, V., Hlova, I., & Zasiekina, L. (2022). War stories in social media: Personal experience of Russia-Ukraine war. East European Journal of Psycholinguistics, 9(2), 160-170. https://doi.org/10.29038/eejpl.2022.9.2.zas