Distribución de tiempo de interacción como igualación de distancia social. Aplicación en el juego de la confianza

ilustraciones, diagramas

Autores:: Gil Mateus, Edwin Oswaldo

Tipo de recurso:: Doctoral thesis

Fecha de publicación:: 2023

Institución:: Universidad Nacional de Colombia

Repositorio:: Universidad Nacional de Colombia

Idioma:: spa

id	UNACIONAL2_6bf8299a4429911a0910b3511c8554b5
oai_identifier_str	oai:repositorio.unal.edu.co:unal/84588
network_acronym_str	UNACIONAL2
network_name_str	Universidad Nacional de Colombia
repository_id_str
dc.title.spa.fl_str_mv	Distribución de tiempo de interacción como igualación de distancia social. Aplicación en el juego de la confianza
dc.title.translated.eng.fl_str_mv	Allocation of interaction time as matching of social distance. Application in trust game
title	Distribución de tiempo de interacción como igualación de distancia social. Aplicación en el juego de la confianza
spellingShingle	Distribución de tiempo de interacción como igualación de distancia social. Aplicación en el juego de la confianza 150 - Psicología Conducta social Social Behavior Distanciamiento físico Physical Distancing Altruismo Altruism Distancia social Igualación Tiempo de interacción Distribución Social distance Matching Interaction time Allocation
title_short	Distribución de tiempo de interacción como igualación de distancia social. Aplicación en el juego de la confianza
title_full	Distribución de tiempo de interacción como igualación de distancia social. Aplicación en el juego de la confianza
title_fullStr	Distribución de tiempo de interacción como igualación de distancia social. Aplicación en el juego de la confianza
title_full_unstemmed	Distribución de tiempo de interacción como igualación de distancia social. Aplicación en el juego de la confianza
title_sort	Distribución de tiempo de interacción como igualación de distancia social. Aplicación en el juego de la confianza
dc.creator.fl_str_mv	Gil Mateus, Edwin Oswaldo
dc.contributor.advisor.none.fl_str_mv	Clavijo Alvarez, Álvaro Arturo
dc.contributor.author.none.fl_str_mv	Gil Mateus, Edwin Oswaldo
dc.contributor.orcid.spa.fl_str_mv	Gil-Mateus, Edwin Oswaldo [0000000277120137]
dc.contributor.researchgate.spa.fl_str_mv	Gil-Mateus, Edwin O. []
dc.subject.ddc.spa.fl_str_mv	150 - Psicología
topic	150 - Psicología Conducta social Social Behavior Distanciamiento físico Physical Distancing Altruismo Altruism Distancia social Igualación Tiempo de interacción Distribución Social distance Matching Interaction time Allocation
dc.subject.decs.none.fl_str_mv	Conducta social Social Behavior Distanciamiento físico Physical Distancing
dc.subject.lemb.none.fl_str_mv	Altruismo Altruism
dc.subject.proposal.spa.fl_str_mv	Distancia social Igualación Tiempo de interacción Distribución
dc.subject.proposal.eng.fl_str_mv	Social distance Matching Interaction time Allocation
description	ilustraciones, diagramas
publishDate	2023
dc.date.accessioned.none.fl_str_mv	2023-08-23T14:11:14Z
dc.date.available.none.fl_str_mv	2023-08-23T14:11:14Z
dc.date.issued.none.fl_str_mv	2023-08
dc.type.spa.fl_str_mv	Trabajo de grado - Doctorado
dc.type.driver.spa.fl_str_mv	info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
dc.type.version.spa.fl_str_mv	info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
dc.type.coar.spa.fl_str_mv	http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06
dc.type.content.spa.fl_str_mv	Text
dc.type.redcol.spa.fl_str_mv	http://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/TD
format	http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06
status_str	acceptedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.none.fl_str_mv	https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/84588
dc.identifier.instname.spa.fl_str_mv	Universidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.identifier.reponame.spa.fl_str_mv	Repositorio Institucional Universidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.identifier.repourl.spa.fl_str_mv	https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/
url	https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/84588 https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/
identifier_str_mv	Universidad Nacional de Colombia Repositorio Institucional Universidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.language.iso.spa.fl_str_mv	spa
language	spa
dc.relation.references.spa.fl_str_mv	Akerlof, G., (1997). Social Distance and Social Decisions. Econometrica, Vol 65, No. 5 (September), pp. 1005-1027. https://doi.org/10.2307/2171877 Bandura A. (1978) The Self System in Reciprocal Determinism. American Psychologist, Vol 33, No. 4, April. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.33.4.344 Bandura, A. (1983). Temporal dynamics and decomposition of reciprocal determinism: A reply to Phillips and Orton. Psychological Review, 90(2), 166–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.90.2.166 Banton, M. (1960). Social Distance: A New Appreciation. The Sociological Review, 8(2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1960.tb01033.x Bargh, J., & Williams, E. L. (2006). The automaticity of social life. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2006.00395.x Baum, W. M. (1974). On Two Types of Deviation from the Matching Law: Bias and Undermatching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 22 (1), 231-242. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1974.22-231 Baum, W. M. (1997). The trouble with time (chapter 3). https://www.academia.edu/51213107/The_trouble_with_time. In Ghezzi, P., Hayes L. J. (1997) Investigations in Behavioral Epistemology. Context Press, 239 pages. Baum, W. M. (2004). Molar and molecular views of choice. Behavioural Processes, 66(3), 349–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2004.03.013 Baum, W. (2012) “Rethinking reinforcement: Allocation, induction and contingency”. Journal of experimental análisis of behavior, 97, number 1 (january), pp. 101-124. https://doi.org/10.1901%2Fjeab.2012.97-101 Baum, W. M. (2015a) The role of induction in operant schedule performance. In Behavioural Processes 114, 26–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2015.01.006 Baum, W. M. (2015b) Driven by Consequences: The Multiscale Molar View of Choice. Managerial. Decision. Economics. 37: 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.2713 Baum, W. (2018) Three Laws of Behavior: Allocation, Induction and Covariance. Behavior Analysis: Research and Practice, Vol 18, No. 3, pp. 239-251. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bar0000104 Baum, W. M., Rachlin, H. C. (1969). Choice as Time Allocation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 12 (6), 861-874. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1969.12-861 Bechler, C., Green, L., Myerson, J. (2015). Proportion offered in the Dictator and Ultimatum Games decreases with amount and social distance. Behavioural Processes, 115, 149-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2015.04.003 Belisle, J.; Paliliunas, D.; Vangsness, L; Dixon, M. R.; Stanley, C. R. (2020) Social Distance and Delay Exert Multiple Control over Altruistic Choices. The Psychological Record 70, pp 445–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-020-00399-x Ben-Ami Bartal, I., Rodgers, D. A., Bernardez, M. S., Decety, J., Mason, P. (2014) Pro-social behavior in rats is modulated by social experience. eLife, 3:e01385. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.01385 Benoit, Kenneth (2011) Linear Regression Models with Logarithmic Transformations. Methodology Institute London School of Economics. Disponible en: https://kenbenoit.net/assets/courses/ME104/logmodels2.pdf (consultado el 17 de junio de 2022) Berg J., Dickhaut J., McCabe K. (1995) Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History. Games and Economic Behavior, Volume 10, Issue 1, July, Pages 122-142. https://doi.org/10.1006/game.1995.1027 Bogardus, E.S. (1925) Measuring social distance. Journal of Applied Sociology, 9, 299–308. https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Bogardus/Bogardus_1925c.html Bogardus, E.S. (1933) A social distance scale. Sociology and Social Research, 17, 265–271. https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Bogardus/Bogardus_1933.html Borrero, John C.; Crisolo, Stephany S.; Tu, Qiuchen; Rieland, Weston A.; Ross, Noël A., Francisco, Monica T.; Yamamoto, Kenny Y. (2007). An application of the matching law to social dynamics. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 589–601 Number 4 (winter). https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1901/jaba.2007.589-601 Brown, J., Rachlin, H. (1999). Self-control and social cooperation. Behavioural Processes, 47, 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-6357(99)00054-6 Buddiga, N. R.; Locey, M. L. (2021) Reciprocal Discounting: A Pilot Study. The Psychological Record 72, pages505–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-020-00449-4 Camerer, C. F., (2003). Behavioral Game Theory. Experiments in Strategic Interaction. Russell Sage Foundation. Princeton University Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2003-06054-000 Conger, R.; Killeen, P. (1974) Use of Concurrent Operants in Small Group Research: A Demonstration. The Pacific Sociological Review, Vol. 17, No. 4, Oct., pp. 399-416. https://doi.org/10.2307/1388548 Charlton, S. R., Gossett, B. D., Charlton, V. A. (2012). Effect of delay and social distance on the perceived value of social interaction. Behavioural Processes, 89, 23–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2011.10.003 Chatterjea, R. G.; Basu, A. (1978) The relationship between Social Distance and Levels of Conceptual Integration. The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 104, pp. 299-300. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1978.9924074 Dodd, S. C. & Griffiths, K. S. (1958) The Logarithmic Relation of Social Distance and Intensity. The Journal of Social Psychology. 48:1, 91-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1958.9919271 Ethington, P.J. (1997) The intellectual construction of “social distance”: toward a recovery of Georg Simmel’s geometry. Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography, 30. Disponible en http://cybergeo.revues.org/227 (consultado noviembre 28 de 2021). Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U. (2003) The nature of human altruism. Nature 425, 785–791. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02043 Goffman, E. (1966). Behavior in public places. New York: Free Press. 248 pages. Green, L., & Myerson, J. (2004). A discounting framework for choice with delayed and probabilistic rewards. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 769–772. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.769 Hackman, J., Danvers, A., Hruschka D. J. (2015) Closeness is enough for friends, but not mates or kin: mate and kinship premiums in India and U.S. Evolution and Behavior 36, 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2014.10.002 Harris A, Young A, Hughson L, Green D, Doan SN, Hughson E, et al. (2020) Perceived relative social status and cognitive load influence acceptance of unfair offers in the Ultimatum Game. PLoS ONE 15(1): e0227717. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227717 Herrnstein, R. J. (1961) Relative and Absolute Strength of Response as a Function of Frequency of Reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 4 (3), 267-272. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1961.4-267 Hoffman, Elizabeth; McCabe, Kevin; Smith, Vernon L. (1996) Social Distance and Other-Regarding Behavior in Dictator Games. The American Economic Review, Vol 86, No. 3, June, pp. 653-660. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2118218 Hoppler SS, Segerer R and Nikitin J (2022) The Six Components of Social Interactions: Actor, Partner, Relation, Activities, Context, and Evaluation. Frontiers of Psychology. 12:743074. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.743074 Hraba, J.; Hagendoorn, L.; Hagendoorn, R. (1989) The ethnic hierarchy in The Netherlands: Social distance and social representation. In British Journal of Social Psychology. Vol 28, pp. 57-69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1989.tb00846.x Johnston, J. M., Pennypacker, H. S., & Green, G. (2020). Strategies and tactics of behavioral research and practice (4th ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. New York, NY. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2019-48755-000 Jones, B., Rachlin, H. (2006). Social Discounting. Psychological Science 17 (4), 283-286. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01699.x Jones, B., Rachlin, H. (2009). Delay, Probability, and Social Discounting in a Public Goods Game. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 99 (1), 61-73. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2009.91-61 Jones, B. A. (2021) A Review of Social Discounting: The Impact of Social Distance on Altruism. The Psychological Record. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-021-00488-5 Karakayali, Nedim (2017) “Social Distance”. In Turner, Bryan S. The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Theory. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118430873.est0353 Lie-Panis, J.; André, J.-B. (2022) Cooperation as a signal of time preferences. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biology Sciences. 2892021226620212266. http://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2021.2266 Locey, M. L., Rachlin, H. (2015) Altruism and anonymity: A behavioral analysis. Behavioural Processes, 118, 71–75. Locey, M. L.; Safin, V.; Rachlin, H. (2013). Social Discounting and The Prisoner’s Dilemma Game. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 99 (1), 85-97. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.3 Locey, M. L., Jones, B. A., & Rachlin, H. (2013). Self-control and altruism. In G. J. Madden, W. V. Dube, T. D. Hackenberg, G. P. Hanley, & K. A. Lattal (Eds.), APA handbook of behavior analysis, Vol. 1. Methods and principles (pp. 463–481). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13937-020 Magee, J. C., & Smith, P. K. (2013). The social distance theory of power. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(2), 158–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312472732 Mazur, J.E. (1987). An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. In M.L. Commons, J.E. Mazur, J.A. Nevin, & H. Rachlin (Eds.), Quantitative analysis of behavior: Vol. 5. The effect of delay and of intervening events on reinforcement value (pp. 55–73). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1986-98701-003 Mele, V. (2017) “Social Interaction”. In Turner Bryan S. (2017) The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Theory. Edited by Bryan S. Turner. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118430873.est0811 Morris, S. M., Vollmer T. R. (2022a) Increasing social time allocation and concomitant effects on mands, item engagement, and rigid or repetitive behavior. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis Vol. 55 (3), pp. 814-831. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.919 Morris, S. M., Vollmer T. R. (2022b) The matching law provides a quantitative description of social time allocation in children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis Vol. 55 (3), pp. 934-957. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.934 Nettle, D.; Harper, Z.; Kidson, A.; Stone, R.; Penton-Voak, I. S.; & Bateson, M. (2013). The watching eyes effect in the Dictator Game: It's not how much you give, it's being seen to give something. Evolution and Human Behavior 34(1):35-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.08.004 Papasteri CC, Sofonea A, Boldasu R, Poalelungi C, Tomescu MI, Pistol CAD, Vasilescu RI, Nedelcea C, Podina IR, Berceanu AI, Froemke RC and Carcea I (2020) Social Feedback During Sensorimotor Synchronization Changes Salivary Oxytocin and Behavioral States. Front. Psychol. 11:531046. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.531046 Park, R.E. (1924) The Concept of Social Distance As Applied to the Study of Racial Attitudes and Racial Relations. Journal of Applied Sociology 8 (1924): 339-344. https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Park/Park_1924.html Parrillo, V.N. and Donoghue, C. (2005) Updating the Bogardus social distance studies: a new national survey. The Social Science Journal, 42 (2), 257–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2005.03.011 Patterson, Miles L. (2016) Environment and Social Interaction. In Berger, Charles R. & Roloff, Michael E. The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication, First Edition. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic100 Premack, D. (1962) Reversibility of the Reinforcement Relation. Science 136, 255-257. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.136.3512.255 Rachlin, H. (1995) The Value of Temporal Patterns in Behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol 4, No. 6, December, pp. 188-192. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10772634 Rachlin, H. (2006). Notes on Discounting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 85 (3), 425-435. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2006.85-05 Rachlin, H., Jones, B. A. (2008a). Social Discounting and Delay Discounting. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 29-43. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.567 Rachlin H., Jones, B. A. (2008b) Altruism among relatives and non-relatives. Behavioural Processes, 79, 120-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2008.06.002 Romanowich, P. (2021) Sharing Personal Information is Discounted as a Function of Social Distance. The Psychological Record 72, pages 497–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-021-00494-7 Safin, V., Arfer, K. B., Rachlin, H. (2015). Reciprocation and altruism in social cooperation. Behavioural Processes 116, 12-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2015.04.009 Safin, V., Locey, M. L., Rachlin H. (2013) Valuing rewards to others in a prisoner’s dilemma game. Behavioural Processes, 99, 145-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2013.07.008 Safin, V. & Rachlin, H. (2020) “A ratio scale for social distance”. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. Volume 114, Issue 1, July, Pages 72-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.614 Samuelson, P. A. (1948). Consumption Theory in Terms of Revealed Preference. Economica, 15(60), 243–253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2549561 Scheele, D., Striepens, N., Güntürkün O., Deutschländer S., Maier W., Kendrick K. M., Hurlemann, R. (2012) Oxytocin Modulates Social Distance between Males and Females. The Journal of Neuroscience, November 14, 2012 • 32(46):16074 –16079. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2755-12.2012 Segal, E.F., 1972. Induction and the provenance of operants. In: Gilbert, R.M., Millenson, J.R. (Eds.), Reinforcement: Behavioral Analyses. Academic, New York, pp. 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-283150-8.50006-X Simmel, G. (1923) Soziologie, Dunker und Humboldt, Munich. Traducción en español como Simmel, G. (2014) Sociología: estudios sobre las formas de socialización. FCE, México. 727 pp. https://www.fondodeculturaeconomica.com/Ficha/9786071626455/F Simon, J. L. (1995) Interpersonal Allocation Continuous with Intertemporal Allocation: Binding Commitments, Pledges, and Bequests. Rationality and Society, 7(4), 367–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/104346319500700402 Simon, C.; Baum, W. M. (2017). Allocation of speech in conversation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 107(2), 258–278. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.249 Staddon, J. E. R., Simmelhag, V. L. (1971). The "supersitition" experiment: A Reexamination of Its Implications for the Principles of Adaptive Behavior. Psychological Review, 78, (1), 3-43. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0030305 Staddon, J. E. R. (1984) Social Learning Theory and the Dynamics of Interaction. Psychological Review, Vol 91, No. 4, pp. 502-507. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.91.4.502 Toledo, Aldo Cristian; Ávila, Raúl (2017) Descuento social en pares de personas en diferentes posiciones sociales con respecto al individuo eligiendo. Conductual, Vol 5, No. 2, pp. 61-74. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/43Fbptr (consultado el 19 agosto de 2020). Toledo A. C.; Avila, R. (2021) Nondiscounted Costs and Socially Discounted Benefits as Predictors of Cooperation in Prisoner’s Dilemma Games. The Psychological Record https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-020-00448-5 Tracy, K., (2012) “Language and Social Interaction”. In Donsbach, Wolfgang, The International Encyclopedia of Communication, First Edition. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405186407.wbiecl006.pub2 Wark, C; Galliher J. F. (2007) Emory Bogardus and the Origins of the Social Distance Scale. In The American Sociologist. 38 (4): 383–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-007-9023-9 Williams, Joyce E. (2015) “Social Distance”. In Ritzer, George (2015) The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405165518.wbeoss145.pub2 Yu, Rongjun; Hu, Pan, Hu, Zhang Ping (2015) “Social distance and anonymity modulate fairness consideration: An ERP study”. In Nature: Scientific Reports, 5, 13452. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep13452
dc.rights.coar.fl_str_mv	http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rights.license.spa.fl_str_mv	Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional
dc.rights.uri.spa.fl_str_mv	http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rights.accessrights.spa.fl_str_mv	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv	Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
eu_rights_str_mv	openAccess
dc.format.extent.spa.fl_str_mv	121 páginas
dc.format.mimetype.spa.fl_str_mv	application/pdf
dc.publisher.spa.fl_str_mv	Universidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.publisher.program.spa.fl_str_mv	Bogotá - Ciencias Humanas - Doctorado en Psicología
dc.publisher.faculty.spa.fl_str_mv	Facultad de Ciencias Humanas
dc.publisher.place.spa.fl_str_mv	Bogotá, Colombia
dc.publisher.branch.spa.fl_str_mv	Universidad Nacional de Colombia - Sede Bogotá
institution	Universidad Nacional de Colombia
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv	https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/bitstream/unal/84588/3/license.txt https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/bitstream/unal/84588/4/79733008.2023.pdf https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/bitstream/unal/84588/5/79733008.2023.pdf.jpg
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv	eb34b1cf90b7e1103fc9dfd26be24b4a 671d74dbc98e57e522336b66fef8dfea 5e52e830770be3ba362b5e4e02faec9e
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv	MD5 MD5 MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv	Repositorio Institucional Universidad Nacional de Colombia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv	repositorio_nal@unal.edu.co
_version_	1814089689394577408
spelling	Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacionalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2Clavijo Alvarez, Álvaro Arturofd1d42753a271698cee51d77e169186cGil Mateus, Edwin Oswaldoa3912b18bdea02147f717cf6627a1d40Gil-Mateus, Edwin Oswaldo [0000000277120137]Gil-Mateus, Edwin O. []2023-08-23T14:11:14Z2023-08-23T14:11:14Z2023-08https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/84588Universidad Nacional de ColombiaRepositorio Institucional Universidad Nacional de Colombiahttps://repositorio.unal.edu.co/ilustraciones, diagramasLa distancia social (DS) es una medida psicofísica sobre la cercanía o lejanía con la que una persona percibe a otras. En el análisis de la conducta esta medida ha sido usada en el descuento social, en forma de ordenación de preferencia con la posición de cada persona en un grupo definido previamente. Una vez establecida la ordenación, el participante elige en función de la distancia social entregar un monto de dinero. Si la distancia es mayor, el dinero entregado disminuye y viceversa, así que la distancia social pronostica la conducta altruista. La medición de distancia social ha indicado una preferencia ordinal, pero no muestra la magnitud o cardinalidad de la preferencia, así como advertir la relevancia de la interacción en la medida. De igual manera, la distancia social es asemejada a una dimensión física de longitud (espacio) como estructuración de las relaciones sociales. En contraste, considerando la interacción en la ordenación de preferencia, el tiempo como otra dimensión física que podría indicar una medida de distancia social. Con lo anterior, la ordenación de preferencia medida por el tiempo puede relacionarse, a su vez, con conductas prosociales en las que sean asignados recursos a otros con un costo propio para quien los asigna. Esta investigación propone que la disposición a distribuir tiempo para interactuar (TI) iguala a la ordenación de distancia social. También se plantea que la distribución de tiempo puede servir como predictor de la asignación de recursos a otros. Las hipótesis son evaluadas en cuatro estudios. En el primero, los participantes imaginaron grupos con personas conocidas, distribuyeron tiempos de interacción (duración, espera y repetición), para después ordenar el grupo de acuerdo con la escala discreta de distancia social. En el segundo, otros participantes conformaron grupos en los que interactuaron realmente en dos momentos realizando tareas académicas, desarrollando al final de cada momento la tarea de distribución de tiempos de duración de interacción y la ordenación de preferencia. Se plantearon los dos momentos para revisar el efecto de la interacción real sobre la disposición a distribuir tiempo para volver a interactuar, además de observar si la ordenación de distancia social se mantuvo o cambió. En el tercero, igual que en el primer estudio, los participantes imaginaron grupos de personas que conocían para desarrollar con la distribución de tiempo en la duración a volver a interactuar y la ordenación de preferencia, para después hacer una tarea de entrega de dinero con la estructura del juego de la confianza. En el cuarto, los participantes conformaron grupos llevando a cabo interacciones reales con labores académicas durante cuatro momentos, para al final de cada momento llevar a cabo las tareas de asignación, ordenación y entrega de dinero. Los 4 momentos fueron considerados para examinar el cambio de ajuste de las variables dada la interacción. En general, la evidencia encontrada muestra una relación inversa entre la distribución de tiempo de interacción y la ordenación de distancia social. Además, la distribución de tiempo de interacción, como igualación de distancia social, predice la conducta de entrega de dinero a otros, según lo registrado con el esquema de juego de confianza utilizado. Los resultados del estudio 1 indicaron que las medidas de distribución de tiempo como duración de una interacción y disposición a seguir interactuando, si aumentan la distancia social es menor, mientras que con la espera para volver a interactuar la relación fue directa. El estudio 2, además de coincidir las estimaciones con el anterior, mostró que las 3 medidas de asignación de tiempo mejoraron del momento 1 al 2, en especial para el individuo considerado como más cercano. En el estudio 3, la duración de la interacción explicó en 85% la variación de la DS, mientras que la duración de la interacción está correlacionada directamente con la entrega de dinero en el juego, con un R2=0,71. Finalmente, el estudio 4 con los datos obtenidos en los cuatro momentos, fue corroborado lo hallado en el anterior, con R2=0,98. En el momento 3 de este estudio, cuando los grupos se reconfiguraron con participantes sin interacción, el TI explicó la DS en 73%. (Texto tomado de la fuente)Social distance (SD) is a psychophysical measure of the closeness or distance with which a person perceives others. In behavior analysis, this measure is used in the social discount, in the form of preference ordering with the position of each person in a previously defined group. Once the ordering is established, the participant chooses based on the social distance to deliver an amount of money, so if the distance is greater, the money delivered decreases and vice versa, so the social distance predicts altruistic behavior. The measurement of social distance has indicated an ordinal preference, but does not show the magnitude or cardinality of the preference, as well as noticing the relevance of the interaction in the measurement. In the same way, social distance is similar to a physical dimension of length (space) as a structuring of social relations. In contrast, considering the interaction in preference ordering, time as another physical dimension that could indicate a measure of social distance. With the above, the ordering of preference measured by time can be related, in turn, to prosocial behaviors in which resources are assigned to others at their own cost to the assigner. This research proposes that the willingness to allocate time to interact (TI) equals the ordering of social distance. It is also suggested that the distribution of time can serve as a predictor of the allocation of resources to others. The hypotheses are tested in four studies. In the first, the participants imagined groups with familiar people, distributed interaction times (duration, wait, and repetition), and then ordered the group according to the discrete scale of social distance. In the second, other participants formed groups in which they actually interacted in two moments carrying out academic tasks, developing at the end of each moment the task of distribution of interaction duration times and the ordering of preference. The two moments were considered to review the effect of actual interaction on the willingness to allocate time to interact again, in addition to observing whether the order of social distance was maintained or changed. In the third, as in the first study, the participants imagined groups of people they knew to develop with the distribution of time in the duration to re-interact and the ordering of preference, to later do a task of giving money with the structure of the trust game. In the fourth, the participants formed groups carrying out real interactions with academic tasks during four moments, to at the end of each moment carry out the tasks of assigning, ordering and delivering money. The 4 moments were considered to examine the adjustment change of the variables given the interaction. In general, the evidence found shows an inverse relationship between the distribution of interaction time and the ordering of social distance. In addition, the distribution of interaction time, such as social distance matching, predicts the behavior of giving money to others, as recorded with the trust game scheme used. The results of study 1 indicated that the measures of time distribution such as duration of an interaction and willingness to continue interacting, if they increase the social distance is less, while with the wait to interact again the relationship was direct. Study 2, in addition to matching the estimates with the previous one, showed that the 3 measures of time allocation improved from moment 1 to moment 2, especially for the individual considered closest. In study 3, the duration of the interaction explained 85% of the variation in SD, while the duration of the interaction is directly correlated with the delivery of money in the game, with R2=0.71. Finally, study 4 with the data obtained at the four moments, corroborated what was found in the previous one, with R2=0.98. At time 3 of this study, when the groups were reconfigured with participants without interaction, the IT explained the SD in 73%.DoctoradoDoctor en PsicologíaPsicología Básica y Experimental Elecciones sociales121 páginasapplication/pdfspaUniversidad Nacional de ColombiaBogotá - Ciencias Humanas - Doctorado en PsicologíaFacultad de Ciencias HumanasBogotá, ColombiaUniversidad Nacional de Colombia - Sede Bogotá150 - PsicologíaConducta socialSocial BehaviorDistanciamiento físicoPhysical DistancingAltruismoAltruismDistancia socialIgualaciónTiempo de interacciónDistribuciónSocial distanceMatchingInteraction timeAllocationDistribución de tiempo de interacción como igualación de distancia social. Aplicación en el juego de la confianzaAllocation of interaction time as matching of social distance. Application in trust gameTrabajo de grado - Doctoradoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06Texthttp://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/TDAkerlof, G., (1997). Social Distance and Social Decisions. Econometrica, Vol 65, No. 5 (September), pp. 1005-1027. https://doi.org/10.2307/2171877Bandura A. (1978) The Self System in Reciprocal Determinism. American Psychologist, Vol 33, No. 4, April. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.33.4.344Bandura, A. (1983). Temporal dynamics and decomposition of reciprocal determinism: A reply to Phillips and Orton. Psychological Review, 90(2), 166–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.90.2.166Banton, M. (1960). Social Distance: A New Appreciation. The Sociological Review, 8(2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1960.tb01033.xBargh, J., & Williams, E. L. (2006). The automaticity of social life. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2006.00395.xBaum, W. M. (1974). On Two Types of Deviation from the Matching Law: Bias and Undermatching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 22 (1), 231-242. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1974.22-231Baum, W. M. (1997). The trouble with time (chapter 3). https://www.academia.edu/51213107/The_trouble_with_time. In Ghezzi, P., Hayes L. J. (1997) Investigations in Behavioral Epistemology. Context Press, 239 pages.Baum, W. M. (2004). Molar and molecular views of choice. Behavioural Processes, 66(3), 349–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2004.03.013Baum, W. (2012) “Rethinking reinforcement: Allocation, induction and contingency”. Journal of experimental análisis of behavior, 97, number 1 (january), pp. 101-124. https://doi.org/10.1901%2Fjeab.2012.97-101Baum, W. M. (2015a) The role of induction in operant schedule performance. In Behavioural Processes 114, 26–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2015.01.006Baum, W. M. (2015b) Driven by Consequences: The Multiscale Molar View of Choice. Managerial. Decision. Economics. 37: 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.2713Baum, W. (2018) Three Laws of Behavior: Allocation, Induction and Covariance. Behavior Analysis: Research and Practice, Vol 18, No. 3, pp. 239-251. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bar0000104Baum, W. M., Rachlin, H. C. (1969). Choice as Time Allocation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 12 (6), 861-874. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1969.12-861Bechler, C., Green, L., Myerson, J. (2015). Proportion offered in the Dictator and Ultimatum Games decreases with amount and social distance. Behavioural Processes, 115, 149-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2015.04.003Belisle, J.; Paliliunas, D.; Vangsness, L; Dixon, M. R.; Stanley, C. R. (2020) Social Distance and Delay Exert Multiple Control over Altruistic Choices. The Psychological Record 70, pp 445–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-020-00399-xBen-Ami Bartal, I., Rodgers, D. A., Bernardez, M. S., Decety, J., Mason, P. (2014) Pro-social behavior in rats is modulated by social experience. eLife, 3:e01385. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.01385Benoit, Kenneth (2011) Linear Regression Models with Logarithmic Transformations. Methodology Institute London School of Economics. Disponible en: https://kenbenoit.net/assets/courses/ME104/logmodels2.pdf (consultado el 17 de junio de 2022)Berg J., Dickhaut J., McCabe K. (1995) Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History. Games and Economic Behavior, Volume 10, Issue 1, July, Pages 122-142. https://doi.org/10.1006/game.1995.1027Bogardus, E.S. (1925) Measuring social distance. Journal of Applied Sociology, 9, 299–308. https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Bogardus/Bogardus_1925c.htmlBogardus, E.S. (1933) A social distance scale. Sociology and Social Research, 17, 265–271. https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Bogardus/Bogardus_1933.htmlBorrero, John C.; Crisolo, Stephany S.; Tu, Qiuchen; Rieland, Weston A.; Ross, Noël A., Francisco, Monica T.; Yamamoto, Kenny Y. (2007). An application of the matching law to social dynamics. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 589–601 Number 4 (winter). https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1901/jaba.2007.589-601Brown, J., Rachlin, H. (1999). Self-control and social cooperation. Behavioural Processes, 47, 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-6357(99)00054-6Buddiga, N. R.; Locey, M. L. (2021) Reciprocal Discounting: A Pilot Study. The Psychological Record 72, pages505–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-020-00449-4Camerer, C. F., (2003). Behavioral Game Theory. Experiments in Strategic Interaction. Russell Sage Foundation. Princeton University Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2003-06054-000Conger, R.; Killeen, P. (1974) Use of Concurrent Operants in Small Group Research: A Demonstration. The Pacific Sociological Review, Vol. 17, No. 4, Oct., pp. 399-416. https://doi.org/10.2307/1388548Charlton, S. R., Gossett, B. D., Charlton, V. A. (2012). Effect of delay and social distance on the perceived value of social interaction. Behavioural Processes, 89, 23–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2011.10.003Chatterjea, R. G.; Basu, A. (1978) The relationship between Social Distance and Levels of Conceptual Integration. The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 104, pp. 299-300. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1978.9924074Dodd, S. C. & Griffiths, K. S. (1958) The Logarithmic Relation of Social Distance and Intensity. The Journal of Social Psychology. 48:1, 91-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1958.9919271Ethington, P.J. (1997) The intellectual construction of “social distance”: toward a recovery of Georg Simmel’s geometry. Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography, 30. Disponible en http://cybergeo.revues.org/227 (consultado noviembre 28 de 2021).Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U. (2003) The nature of human altruism. Nature 425, 785–791. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02043Goffman, E. (1966). Behavior in public places. New York: Free Press. 248 pages.Green, L., & Myerson, J. (2004). A discounting framework for choice with delayed and probabilistic rewards. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 769–772. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.769Hackman, J., Danvers, A., Hruschka D. J. (2015) Closeness is enough for friends, but not mates or kin: mate and kinship premiums in India and U.S. Evolution and Behavior 36, 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2014.10.002Harris A, Young A, Hughson L, Green D, Doan SN, Hughson E, et al. (2020) Perceived relative social status and cognitive load influence acceptance of unfair offers in the Ultimatum Game. PLoS ONE 15(1): e0227717. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227717Herrnstein, R. J. (1961) Relative and Absolute Strength of Response as a Function of Frequency of Reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 4 (3), 267-272. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1961.4-267Hoffman, Elizabeth; McCabe, Kevin; Smith, Vernon L. (1996) Social Distance and Other-Regarding Behavior in Dictator Games. The American Economic Review, Vol 86, No. 3, June, pp. 653-660. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2118218Hoppler SS, Segerer R and Nikitin J (2022) The Six Components of Social Interactions: Actor, Partner, Relation, Activities, Context, and Evaluation. Frontiers of Psychology. 12:743074. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.743074Hraba, J.; Hagendoorn, L.; Hagendoorn, R. (1989) The ethnic hierarchy in The Netherlands: Social distance and social representation. In British Journal of Social Psychology. Vol 28, pp. 57-69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1989.tb00846.xJohnston, J. M., Pennypacker, H. S., & Green, G. (2020). Strategies and tactics of behavioral research and practice (4th ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. New York, NY. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2019-48755-000Jones, B., Rachlin, H. (2006). Social Discounting. Psychological Science 17 (4), 283-286. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01699.xJones, B., Rachlin, H. (2009). Delay, Probability, and Social Discounting in a Public Goods Game. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 99 (1), 61-73. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2009.91-61Jones, B. A. (2021) A Review of Social Discounting: The Impact of Social Distance on Altruism. The Psychological Record. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-021-00488-5Karakayali, Nedim (2017) “Social Distance”. In Turner, Bryan S. The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Theory. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118430873.est0353Lie-Panis, J.; André, J.-B. (2022) Cooperation as a signal of time preferences. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biology Sciences. 2892021226620212266. http://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2021.2266Locey, M. L., Rachlin, H. (2015) Altruism and anonymity: A behavioral analysis. Behavioural Processes, 118, 71–75.Locey, M. L.; Safin, V.; Rachlin, H. (2013). Social Discounting and The Prisoner’s Dilemma Game. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 99 (1), 85-97. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.3Locey, M. L., Jones, B. A., & Rachlin, H. (2013). Self-control and altruism. In G. J. Madden, W. V. Dube, T. D. Hackenberg, G. P. Hanley, & K. A. Lattal (Eds.), APA handbook of behavior analysis, Vol. 1. Methods and principles (pp. 463–481). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13937-020Magee, J. C., & Smith, P. K. (2013). The social distance theory of power. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(2), 158–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312472732Mazur, J.E. (1987). An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. In M.L. Commons, J.E. Mazur, J.A. Nevin, & H. Rachlin (Eds.), Quantitative analysis of behavior: Vol. 5. The effect of delay and of intervening events on reinforcement value (pp. 55–73). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1986-98701-003Mele, V. (2017) “Social Interaction”. In Turner Bryan S. (2017) The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Theory. Edited by Bryan S. Turner. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118430873.est0811Morris, S. M., Vollmer T. R. (2022a) Increasing social time allocation and concomitant effects on mands, item engagement, and rigid or repetitive behavior. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis Vol. 55 (3), pp. 814-831. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.919Morris, S. M., Vollmer T. R. (2022b) The matching law provides a quantitative description of social time allocation in children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis Vol. 55 (3), pp. 934-957. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.934Nettle, D.; Harper, Z.; Kidson, A.; Stone, R.; Penton-Voak, I. S.; & Bateson, M. (2013). The watching eyes effect in the Dictator Game: It's not how much you give, it's being seen to give something. Evolution and Human Behavior 34(1):35-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.08.004Papasteri CC, Sofonea A, Boldasu R, Poalelungi C, Tomescu MI, Pistol CAD, Vasilescu RI, Nedelcea C, Podina IR, Berceanu AI, Froemke RC and Carcea I (2020) Social Feedback During Sensorimotor Synchronization Changes Salivary Oxytocin and Behavioral States. Front. Psychol. 11:531046. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.531046Park, R.E. (1924) The Concept of Social Distance As Applied to the Study of Racial Attitudes and Racial Relations. Journal of Applied Sociology 8 (1924): 339-344. https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Park/Park_1924.htmlParrillo, V.N. and Donoghue, C. (2005) Updating the Bogardus social distance studies: a new national survey. The Social Science Journal, 42 (2), 257–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2005.03.011Patterson, Miles L. (2016) Environment and Social Interaction. In Berger, Charles R. & Roloff, Michael E. The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication, First Edition. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic100Premack, D. (1962) Reversibility of the Reinforcement Relation. Science 136, 255-257. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.136.3512.255Rachlin, H. (1995) The Value of Temporal Patterns in Behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol 4, No. 6, December, pp. 188-192. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10772634Rachlin, H. (2006). Notes on Discounting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 85 (3), 425-435. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2006.85-05Rachlin, H., Jones, B. A. (2008a). Social Discounting and Delay Discounting. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 29-43. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.567Rachlin H., Jones, B. A. (2008b) Altruism among relatives and non-relatives. Behavioural Processes, 79, 120-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2008.06.002Romanowich, P. (2021) Sharing Personal Information is Discounted as a Function of Social Distance. The Psychological Record 72, pages 497–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-021-00494-7Safin, V., Arfer, K. B., Rachlin, H. (2015). Reciprocation and altruism in social cooperation. Behavioural Processes 116, 12-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2015.04.009Safin, V., Locey, M. L., Rachlin H. (2013) Valuing rewards to others in a prisoner’s dilemma game. Behavioural Processes, 99, 145-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2013.07.008Safin, V. & Rachlin, H. (2020) “A ratio scale for social distance”. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. Volume 114, Issue 1, July, Pages 72-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.614Samuelson, P. A. (1948). Consumption Theory in Terms of Revealed Preference. Economica, 15(60), 243–253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2549561Scheele, D., Striepens, N., Güntürkün O., Deutschländer S., Maier W., Kendrick K. M., Hurlemann, R. (2012) Oxytocin Modulates Social Distance between Males and Females. The Journal of Neuroscience, November 14, 2012 • 32(46):16074 –16079. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2755-12.2012Segal, E.F., 1972. Induction and the provenance of operants. In: Gilbert, R.M., Millenson, J.R. (Eds.), Reinforcement: Behavioral Analyses. Academic, New York, pp. 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-283150-8.50006-XSimmel, G. (1923) Soziologie, Dunker und Humboldt, Munich. Traducción en español como Simmel, G. (2014) Sociología: estudios sobre las formas de socialización. FCE, México. 727 pp. https://www.fondodeculturaeconomica.com/Ficha/9786071626455/FSimon, J. L. (1995) Interpersonal Allocation Continuous with Intertemporal Allocation: Binding Commitments, Pledges, and Bequests. Rationality and Society, 7(4), 367–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/104346319500700402Simon, C.; Baum, W. M. (2017). Allocation of speech in conversation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 107(2), 258–278. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.249Staddon, J. E. R., Simmelhag, V. L. (1971). The "supersitition" experiment: A Reexamination of Its Implications for the Principles of Adaptive Behavior. Psychological Review, 78, (1), 3-43. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0030305Staddon, J. E. R. (1984) Social Learning Theory and the Dynamics of Interaction. Psychological Review, Vol 91, No. 4, pp. 502-507. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.91.4.502Toledo, Aldo Cristian; Ávila, Raúl (2017) Descuento social en pares de personas en diferentes posiciones sociales con respecto al individuo eligiendo. Conductual, Vol 5, No. 2, pp. 61-74. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/43Fbptr (consultado el 19 agosto de 2020).Toledo A. C.; Avila, R. (2021) Nondiscounted Costs and Socially Discounted Benefits as Predictors of Cooperation in Prisoner’s Dilemma Games. The Psychological Record https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-020-00448-5Tracy, K., (2012) “Language and Social Interaction”. In Donsbach, Wolfgang, The International Encyclopedia of Communication, First Edition. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405186407.wbiecl006.pub2Wark, C; Galliher J. F. (2007) Emory Bogardus and the Origins of the Social Distance Scale. In The American Sociologist. 38 (4): 383–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-007-9023-9Williams, Joyce E. (2015) “Social Distance”. In Ritzer, George (2015) The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405165518.wbeoss145.pub2Yu, Rongjun; Hu, Pan, Hu, Zhang Ping (2015) “Social distance and anonymity modulate fairness consideration: An ERP study”. In Nature: Scientific Reports, 5, 13452. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep13452EstudiantesInvestigadoresPúblico generalLICENSElicense.txtlicense.txttext/plain; charset=utf-85879https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/bitstream/unal/84588/3/license.txteb34b1cf90b7e1103fc9dfd26be24b4aMD53ORIGINAL79733008.2023.pdf79733008.2023.pdfTesis de Doctorado en Psicologíaapplication/pdf2033613https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/bitstream/unal/84588/4/79733008.2023.pdf671d74dbc98e57e522336b66fef8dfeaMD54THUMBNAIL79733008.2023.pdf.jpg79733008.2023.pdf.jpgGenerated Thumbnailimage/jpeg4798https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/bitstream/unal/84588/5/79733008.2023.pdf.jpg5e52e830770be3ba362b5e4e02faec9eMD55unal/84588oai:repositorio.unal.edu.co:unal/845882023-08-23 23:03:43.778Repositorio Institucional Universidad Nacional de Colombiarepositorio_nal@unal.edu.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

Distribución de tiempo de interacción como igualación de distancia social. Aplicación en el juego de la confianza

Publicaciones similares