中华民族认同是维护国家统一、促进社会和谐、加强民族团结的重要基础。基于“认知-情感-意动”模型,探讨中华民族认同对社会参与的促进机制。具体而言,利用CSS2021调查数据探究个体层面的主观幸福感和社会层面的社会信任在中华民族认同与社会参与之间的中介作用。结果表明：(1) 中华民族认同对社会参与具有正向预测作用;(2) 主观幸福感在中华民族认同与社会参与之间起中介作用;(3) 社会信任在中华民族认同与社会参与之间起中介作用;(4) 主观幸福感和社会信任在中华民族认同与社会参与之间起链式中介作用。增强民众中华民族认同,提升幸福感和信任感,有助于构建“共建共治共享”的社会治理格局。
Abstract
Chinese national identity serves as a critical foundation for maintaining national unity, promoting social harmony, and enhancing ethnic solidarity. According to the social identity theory, individuals’ identification with the social categories or groups to which they belong significantly influences their behavior. Social engagement refers to the process by which members of society engage, intervene, and get involved in the political, economic, social, and cultural life of the nation and in community affairs, thereby impacting social development. “Identity” functions as a crucial motivational mechanism driving public engagement in sustainable development. While there are different degrees, forms, and types of engagement, the psychological basis for people’s willingness to engage in social activities lies in the recognition that they belong to a specific group and they share common ideals, beliefs, and emotional bonds. Consequently, we think Chinese national identity can positively predict social engagement. The cognitive-affective-conative model posits that individuals undergo cognitive processing of knowledge and information, which elicits specific emotional responses, leading to deliberate and planned comprehensive decision-making. Therefore, we also investigate the sequential mediating role of subjective well-being and social trust between Chinese national identity and social engagement. Previous research has provided extensive insights through theoretical reflection, policy interpretation, and case analysis, reflecting the academic community’s concern with significant issues, such as strengthening the sense of community among the Chinese nation. However, there is a notable gap in empirical research on Chinese national identity and its impact, with a relatively limited number of participants. In response to this gap, the present study, grounded in the “cognitive-affective-conative” model and using data from the CSS2021 survey, examines the social-psychological mechanisms through which Chinese national identity influences social engagement, thereby expanding the research on Chinese national identity from a quantitative perspective.
The study investigates the following hypotheses: (1) Chinese national identity positively predicts social engagement; (2) subjective well-being mediates the relationship between Chinese national identity and social engagement; (3) social trust mediates the relationship between Chinese national identity and social engagement; (4) subjective well-being and social trust jointly serve as a chain mediation between Chinese national identity and social engagement. The CSS 2021 project surveyed a total of 10,136 individuals. After excluding incomplete and non-responses, 3,098 valid samples remained, with 1,512 males (48.8%) and 1,586 females (51.2%). The age range of the participants was between 18 and 70 years, with a mean age of 42.47 (SD = 14.57). The findings indicate that Chinese national identity positively predicts social engagement. Subjective well-being mediates the relationship between Chinese national identity and social engagement. Social trust mediates the relationship between Chinese national identity and social engagement. Subjective well-being and social trust function as a chain mediation between Chinese national identity and social engagement.
From the perspective of psychological and behavioral development, during the internalization phase, individuals integrate Chinese national identity into their own belief system and gradually form a profound understanding of the Chinese national community. In the externalization phase, individuals translate this internalized identity into conscious and habitual behaviors, actively engaging in and practicing the awareness of the Chinese national community. In this process of “internalizing in mind and externalizing in action”, individuals’ national consciousness is continuously strengthened, ultimately crystallizing into a firm sense of Chinese national community identity. In future practice, efforts can be made to engage schools, communities, businesses, and government institutions by organizing activities that are both appealing to the public and rich in national memory and cultural characteristics. These activities should help participants understand, learn about, and deeply appreciate Chinese national history. The goal is to internalize these experiences into profound situational memories, thereby strengthening participants’ sense of national identity and enhancing their social engagement. Future research could employ a variety of methods to collect data, ensuring the robustness of result analysis, including multiple respondent reports, field observations and interviews, and laboratory-based behavioral tasks. Additionally, the sequential mediation effect identified in this study represents a partial mediation, indicating that other underlying mechanisms may exist between Chinese national identity and social engagement. Future studies should continue to explore these additional mechanisms.
关键词
中华民族认同 /
社会参与 /
主观幸福感 /
社会信任
Key words
Chinese national identity /
social engagement /
subjective well-being /
social trust
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 常轶军. (2023). 中华民族认同: 三维意涵、结构韧性与政治功能. 思想战线, 49(4), 81-89.
[2] 陈友华, 杨慧康. (2024). 理性选择视角下的社会参与不足及其形成机制. 南开学报(哲学社会科学版), 3, 75-89.
[3] 杜雯翠, 万沁原. (2022). 社会资本对公众亲环境行为的影响研究——来自CGSS2013的经验证据. 软科学, 36(11), 59-64, 80.
[4] 方杰, 邱皓政, 张敏强, 方路. (2013). 我国近十年来心理学研究中HLM方法的应用述评. 心理科学, 36(5), 1194-1200.
[5] 何友晖, 彭泗清, 赵志裕. (2006). 世道人心:对中国人心理的探索. 三联书店.
[6] 胡敏中. (2022). 论认同与信任. 首都师范大学学报(社会科学版), 3, 53-60.
[7] 李静, 黄艳钦. (2024). 铸牢中华民族共同体意识的心理机制研究. 西南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版), 45(3), 1-8.
[8] 柳拯, 刘东升. (2013). 社会参与: 中国社会建设的基础力量. 广东工业大学学报(社会科学版), 13(2), 5-13, 90.
[9] 潘孝富, 何立冬, 陈澔文, 曹坚, 王芸. (2022). 社区认同与社区参与: 社区心理所有权的中介作用与邻里关系的调节作用. 社区心理学研究, 14(2), 21-36.
[10] 彭定萍, 丁峰. (2020). 社会参与影响老年人健康的信任机制研究——基于2015年CGSS数据的实证分析. 北方民族大学学报, 1, 91-98.
[11] 浦昆华, 尹可丽. (2022). 中华民族认同对少数民族青少年学校适应的影响: 亲社会倾向的中介作用. 民族论坛, 2, 24-32.
[12] 齐亚强, 张子馨. (2022). 转型社会中的人际信任及其变迁. 社会学评论, 10(2), 124-144.
[13] 唐有财, 胡兵. (2016). 社区治理中的公众参与: 国家认同与社区认同的双重驱动. 云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 48(2), 63-69.
[14] 王勍, 俞国良. (2016). 群体认同与个体心理健康的关系: 调节变量与作用机制. 心理科学进展, 24(8), 1300-1308.
[15] 王荣, 祖力亚提·司马义. (2023). 心理认同视阈下新疆各民族铸牢中华民族共同体意识研究. 贵州民族研究, 44(5), 9-18.
[16] 温忠麟, 范息涛, 叶宝娟, 陈宇帅. (2016). 从效应量应有的性质看中介效应量的合理性. 心理学报, 48(4), 435-443.
[17] 吴艳, 温忠麟. (2011). 结构方程建模中的题目打包策略. 心理科学进展, 19(12), 1859-1867.
[18] 新华社. (2014-05-29). 习近平强调: 团结各族人民建设社会主义新疆. 取自https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2014-05/29/content_2690269.htm
[19] 新华网. (2021(2021-08-28). 习近平在中央民族工作会议上强调以铸牢中华民族共同体意识为主线推动新时代党的民族工作高质量发展. 取自http://www.news.cn/politics/2021-08/28/c_1127804776.htm
[20] 徐黎丽, 杨丽云. (2020). 论中华民族认同的根基. 西北师大学报(社会科学版), 57(1), 14-21.
[21] 徐延辉, 赖东鹏. (2024). 转型中国的国家认同变迁趋势研究. 社会学研究, 39(2), 88-110, 228.
[22] 颜玉凡, 叶南客. (2019). 认同与参与——城市居民的社区公共文化生活逻辑研究. 社会学研究, 34(2), 147-170, 245.
[23] 张积家. (2019). 民族心理学. 华东师范大学出版社..
[24] 张庆林, 史慧颖, 范丰慧, 张劲梅. (2007). 西南地区少数民族大学生民族认同内隐维度的调查. 西南大学学报(人文社会科学版), 33(1), 67-70.
[25] 赵玉芳, 梁芳美. (2019). 共同内群体认同促进民族心理融合: 双向度测量与SC-IAT检验. 西北师大学报(社会科学版), 56(3), 99-107.
[26] 邹宇春, 刘颖, 赵富民, 陈阳. (2022). 青年生活满意度、政府信任与志愿服务参与行为之间的关系研究——基于CSS2021数据实证研究分析. 青年发展论坛, 32(3), 15-26.
[27] 佐斌, 秦向荣. (2011). 中华民族认同的心理成分和形成机制. 上海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 40(4), 68-76.
[28] Aknin L. B., Barrington-Leigh C. P., Dunn E. W., Helliwell J. F., Burns J., Biswas-Diener R., .. Norton M. I. (2013). Prosocial spending and well-being: Cross-cultural evidence for a psychological universal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(4), 635-652.
[29] Balliet D., Wu J. H., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2014). Ingroup favoritism in cooperation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1556-1581.
[30] Bernhard H., Fischbacher U., & Fehr E. (2006). Parochial altruism in humans. Nature, 442(7105), 912-915.
[31] Delaney T., Castillo L., Friehs M. A., Buttlar B., & Greene C. M. (2024). Us versus them: The role of national identity in the formation of false memories for fake news. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 30(1), 33-47.
[32] Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55(1), 34-43.
[33] Du G., Lyu H. C., & Li X. B. (2022). Social class and subjective well-being in Chinese adults: The mediating role of present fatalistic time perspective. Current Psychology, 41(8), 5412-5419.
[34] Greenaway K. H., Haslam S. A., Cruwys T., Branscombe N. R., Ysseldyk R., & Heldreth C. (2015). From “we” to “me”: Group identification enhances perceived personal control with consequences for health and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(1), 53-74.
[35] Guven, C. (2011). Are happier people better citizens? Kyklos, 64(2), 178-192.
[36] Hilgard, E. R. (1980). The trilogy of mind: Cognition, affection, and conation. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 16(2), 107-117.
[37] Hsiao, C. C. (2020). Understanding content sharing on the internet: Test of a cognitive-affective-conative model. Online Information Review, 44(7), 1289-1306.
[38] Huddy L.,& Del Ponte, A. (2019). National identity, pride, and chauvinism-their origins and consequences for globalization attitudes. In G. Gustavsson & D. Miller (Eds.), Liberal nationalism and its critics: Normative and empirical questions (pp. 38-56). Oxford University Press.
[39] Huddy, L., & Khatib, N. (2007). American patriotism, national identity, and political involvement. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 63-77.
[40] Kachanoff F. J., Bigman Y. E., Kapsaskis K., & Gray K. (2021). Measuring realistic and symbolic threats of COVID-19 and their unique impacts on well-being and adherence to public health behaviors. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(5), 603-616.
[41] Kalin, M., & Sambanis, N. (2018). How to think about social identity. Annual Review of Political Science, 21, 239-257.
[42] Kwon, S.-W., & Adler, P. S. (2014). Social capital: Maturation of a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 39(4), 412-422.
[43] Letki, N., & Evans, G. (2005). Endogenizing social trust: Democratization in East-Central Europe. British Journal of Political Science, 35(3), 515-529.
[44] Lim, S. H., & Kim, D. J. (2020). Does emotional intelligence of online shoppers affect their shopping behavior? From a cognitive-affective-conative framework perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 36(14), 1304-1313.
[45] Mader, M., & Schoen, H. (2023). Stability of national-identity content: Level, predictors, and implications. Political Psychology, 44(4), 871-891.
[46] Phinney, J. S. (1990). Ethnic identity in adolescents and adults: Review of research. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 499-514.
[47] Podsakoff P. M., MacKenzie S. B., Lee J.-Y., & Podsakoff N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
[48] Putnam R. D., Leonardi R., & Nanetti, R. Y. (1994). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy Princeton University Press Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton University Press.
[49] Steptoe A., Deaton A., & Stone A. A. (2015). Subjective wellbeing, health, and ageing. The Lancet, 385(9968), 640-648.
[50] Stets, J. E., & Fares, P. (2019). The effects of race/ethnicity and racial/ethnic identification on general trust. Social Science Research, 80, 1-14.
[51] Stevenson, C., & Manning, R. (2010). National identity and international giving: Irish adults' accounts of charitable behaviour. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 20(4), 249-261.
[52] Tajfel H.,& Turner, J. C. (2004). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In J. T. Jost & J. Sidanius (Eds.), Political psychology: Key readings (pp. 276-293). Psychology Press.
[53] Turner, J. C. (2000). Some current issues in research on social identity and self-categorisation theories. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 6-34). Wiley-Blackwell.
[54] van Bavel J. J., Cichocka A., Capraro V., Sjåstad H., Nezlek J. B., Pavlović T., .. Boggio P. S. (2022). National identity predicts public health support during a global pandemic. Nature Communications, 13(1), Article 517.
[55] van Zomeren M., Postmes T., & Spears R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504-535.
[56] Wakefield J. R. H., Sani F., Madhok V., Norbury M., Dugard P., Gabbanelli C., .. Poggesi F. (2017). The relationship between group identification and satisfaction with life in a cross-cultural community sample. Journal of Happiness Studies, 18(3), 785-807.
[57] Wang D. Y., Tang Y. T., & Wang Y. L. (2023). National identity and public-welfare behavior among Chinese adolescents: A mediated moderation model. European Journal of Psychology Open, 82(1), 9-17.
[58] Yuan X. J., Zeng Z. Y., Chen Q. Y., Ma W. Y., & Wang X. G. (2024). Intergroup trust among Tibetan adolescents in China: The role of intergroup contact and Chinese national identity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 99, Article 101930.
基金
*本研究得到西南民族大学科研启动金资助项目（RQD2024029）的资助
PDF(780 KB)
