Ackerman, J. M., Kenrick, D. T., & Schaller, M. (2007). Is friendship akin to kinship? Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 365–374.
Aron, A., Lewandowski, G. W., Jr., Mashek, D., & Aron, E. N. (2013). The self-expansion model of motivation and cognition in close relationships. In J. A. Simpson & L. Campbell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of close relationships (pp. 90–105). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bailey, K. G. (1988). Psychological kinship: Implications for the helping professions. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 25, 132–141.
Barrett, H. C., & Kurzban, R. (2006). Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate. Psychological Review, 113, 628–647.
Baumeister, R. F., & Sommer, K. L. (1997). What do men want? Gender differences and two spheres of belongingness: Comment Cross and Madson (1997). Psychological
Bulletin, 122,on38–44. Blaustein, A. R. (1983). Kin recognition mechanisms: Phenotypic matching or recognition alleles? The American Naturalist, 121, 749–754. Bleske-Rechek, A. L., & Buss, D. M. (2001). Opposite-sex friendship: Sex differences and similarities in initiation,
selection, and dissolution. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 27, 1310–1323.
Brown, B. B., & Braun, M. T. (2013). Peer relations. In C. Proctor & P. A. Linley (Eds.), Research, applications, and interventions for children and adolescents (pp. 149–164). New York: Springer.
Brown, S. L., & Brown, R. M. (2006). Selective investment theory: Recasting the functional significance of close relationships. Psychological Inquiry, 17, 1–29.
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–14.
Cai, H. (2000). The ending of the paradox of the Na’s kinship structure and the marriage and family. In W. Shu (Ed.), Public rationality and modern scholarism. Beijing, China: Joint Publishing.
[蔡华. (2000). 纳人亲属制度的结构与婚姻家庭悖论的终结 . 见舒炜 (主编).公共理性与现代学术 . 北京: 三联书店.]
Cai, H. (2003). Is marriage system necessary to human existance? Journal of Guangxi University for Nationalities (Philosophy and Social Science Edition), 25, 2–3.
[蔡华. (2003). 婚姻制度是人类生存的绝对必要条件吗？广西民族学院学报(哲学社会科学版), 25, 2–3.]
Chow, C. M., & Ruhl, H. (2014).Friendship and romantic stressors and depression in emerging adulthood: Mediating and moderating roles of attachment representations. Journal of Adult Development, 21, 106–115.
Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Selfconstruals and gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 5–37.
Curtis, V., & Biran, A. (2001). Dirt, disgust, and disease: Is hygiene in our genes? Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 44, 17–31.
Dawkins, R. (1981). The selfish gene. Beijing, China: Science Press.
[道金斯. (1981). 自私的基因.北京: 科学出版社.]
DeBruine, L. M. (2005). Trustworthy but not lust-worthy: Context-specific effects of facial resemblance. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 272, 919–922.
Engels, F. (1972). The origins of families, privates, property systems and states. In Selected works of Marx and Engles (4). Beijing, China: People’s Publishing House. (Original work published 1884).
[恩格斯 . (1972). 家庭、私有制和国家的起源 . 见马克思恩格斯选集(4). 北京: 人民出版社.]
Fessler, D. M. T., & Navarrete, C. D. (2004). Third-party attitudes toward sibling incest: Evidence for Westermarck’s hypothesis. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 277–294.
Fiske, A. P. (1992). The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations. Psychological Review, 99, 689–723.
Freud, S. (1984). An introduction to psychoanalysis. Beijing, China: The Commercial Press.
[西格蒙德.弗洛伊德 . (1984).精神分析引论. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Geary, D. C., & Flinn, M. V. (2002). Sex differences in behavioral and hormonal response to social threat: Commentary on Taylor et al. (2000). Psychological Review, 109, 745–750.
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 Human Behavior, 36, 137–145.
He, Z. H. (1998). Fixed-spouses walking marriage: The contemporary changes of the Yonging Moso’s marriage.
Zhejiang Academic Journal, (5), 68–71.
[和钟华. (1998). 固定专偶走婚 : 永宁摩梭人婚姻的当代变迁. 浙江学刊, (5), 68–71.]
Hiatt, C., Laursen, B., Mooney, K. S., & Rubin, K. H. (2015). Forms of friendship: A person-centered assessment of the quality, stability, and outcomes of different types of adolescent friends. Personality and Individual Differences, 77, 149–155.
Hruschka, D. J. (2010). Friendship: Development, ecology, and evolution of a relationship. California: University of California Press.
Hsu, F. K. (2002). Rugged individualism reconsidered: Essays in psychological anthropology. Taipei: Taipei Nantian Press
[许烺光. (2002). 彻底个人主义的省思. 台北: 南天书局.]
Jones, B., & Rachlin, H. (2006). Social discounting. Psychological Science, 17, 283–286.
Korchmaros, J. D., & Kenny, D. A. (2006). An evolutionary and close-relationship model of helping. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23, 21–43.
Leavitt, G. C. (1990). Sociobiological explanations of incest avoidance: A critical review of evidential claims. American Anthropologist, 92, 971–993.
Leider, S., Möbius, M. M., Rosenblat, T., & Do, Q. A. (2009). Directed altruism and enforced reciprocity in social networks. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124, 1815–1851.
Li, H. M. (1991). The reasons of “Wife stepmother” and “wife sister-in-low”. Donyue Tribune, (3), 84–87.
[李衡眉 . (1991). “妻后母、执嫂”原因探析 . 东岳论丛, (3), 84–87.]
Lieberman, D., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2003). Does morality have a biological basis? An empirical test of the factors governing moral sentiments relating to incest. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 270, 819–826.
Lieberman, D., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2007). The architecture of human kin detection. Nature, 445, 727–731.
Luo, L. Q. (2011). Studies of anti-incest sentiments in evolutionary psychology. Psychological Exploration, 31(3), 204–208.
[罗力群 . (2011). 进化心理学关于反乱伦情感的研究 . 心理学探新, 31(3), 204–208.]
Ma, R. (2000). On the “polyandrous” marriage of the Tibetan ethnic group. Ethno-National Studies, (6), 33–44.
[马戎. (2000). 试论藏族的 “一妻多夫 ”婚姻. 民族研究 , (6), 33–44.]
Maner, J. K., Kenrick, D. T., Becker, D. V., Robertson, T. E., Hofer, B., Neuberg, S. L. … Schaller, M. (2005). Functional projection: How fundamental social motives can bias interpersonal perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 63–78.
Mi, M.Y. (2008). Genes and altruism—A biological interpretation of ethics. Journal of Xiangnan University, 29(1), 15–19, 27.
[米满月. (2008).基因与利他行为 ——道德的生物学解释 . 湘南学院学报, 29(1), 15–19, 27.]
Mulder, M. B. (2007). Hamilton’s rule and kin competition: The Kipsigis case. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 299–312.
Pu, Y. J. (2002). The existing complementation: An explanation to altruism. Economic News Report, 6.21.
[蒲勇健. (2002).存在的互补 ——对利他行为的一种解释 . 经济学消息报, 6.21.]
Pusey, A. E. (2005). Inbreeding avoidance in primates. In A. P.
Wolf & W. H. Durham (Eds.), Inbreeding, incest, and the incest Taboo (pp. 61–75). Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press.
Pusey, A. E., & Wolf, M. (1996). Inbreeding avoidance in animals. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 11, 201–206.
Robertson, R., Shepherd, D., & Goedeke, S. (2014). Fighting like brother and sister: Sibling relationships and future adult romantic relationship quality. Australian Psychologist, 49, 37–43.
Rozin, P., Haidt, J., & McCauley, C. R. (2008). Disgust. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed., pp. 757–776). New York: Guilford.
Rubin, K. H., Wojslawowicz, J. C., Rose-Krasnor, L., Booth-LaForce, C., & Burgess, K. B. (2006). The best friendships of shy/withdrawn children: Prevalence, stability, and relationship quality. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34, 139–153.
Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J. G. (2007). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In W. Damon (Series Ed.), & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (7th ed., pp. 571–645). New York, NY: Wiley.
Shepher, J. (1971). Mate selection among second generation kibbutz adolescents and adults: Incest avoidance and negative imprinting. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1, 293–307.
Shi, C. G. (2008). The Yongning Moso. Kunming, China: Yunnan University Press.
[施传刚. (2008). 永宁摩梭. 昆明: 云南大学出版社.]
Strombach, T., Jin, J., Weber, B., Kenning, P., Shen, Q., Ma,
Q. G., & Kalenscher, T. (2014). Charity begins at home: Cultural differences in social discounting and generosity. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 27, 235–245.
Sun, Q. (2009). Under the same roof: Spousal Relationship. Beijing, China: China Society Press.
[孙铨. (2009). 同在屋檐下 : 夫妻关系 . 北京: 中国社会出版社.]
Thomas, J. J. (2012a). Adolescents’ conceptions of the influence of romantic relationships on friendships. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 173, 198–207.
Thomas, J. J. (2012b). Processes through which adolescents believe romantic relationships influence friendship quality. The Journal of Psychology, 146, 595–616.
Tooby, J., Cosmides, L., & Price, M. E. (2006). Cognitive adaptations for n-person exchange: The evolutionary roots of organizational behavior. Managerial and Decision Economics, 27, 103–129.
Wang, Y. F., & Zhu, Y. (2003). The evaluation of the development of the altruism. Journal of South China University of Technology (Social Science Edition), 5(4), 37–41.
[王雁飞 , 朱瑜. (2003).利他主义行为发展的理论研究述评 . 华南理工大学学报(社会科学版), 5(4), 37–41.] Westermarck, E. A. (2012). The human history of marriage.
Beijing, China: The Commercial Press. [韦斯特马克. (2012). 人类婚姻史. 北京: 商务印书馆.] Wilson, E. O. (1976). Sociology: The new synthesis. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
Wolf, A. P. (1995). Sexual attraction and childhood association: A Chinese brief for Edward Westermarck. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Xu, Y., & Shang, H. P. (2009). Tibetan polyandry: An analysis with cultural anthropology. Nationalities Research in Qinghai, 20(1), 6–14.
[徐扬, 尚会鹏 . (2009).藏族一妻多夫婚俗 : 一项文化人类学分析. 青海民族研究, 20(1), 6–14.]
Yan, R. X., & Song, Z. L. (1983). Yongning Naxi matrilineal system. Kunming, China: Yunnan People’ Publishing Houses. [严汝娴, 宋兆麟 . (1983). 永宁纳西族的母系制 . 昆明: 云
南人民出版社.]
Zhan, C. X., Wang, C. Q., Li, J. C., & Liu, L. C. (2006). The ‘Azhu’ marriage and matriarchy family of Yongning Naxi Nationality (2nd ed.). Shanghai, China: Shanghai People Publishing House.
[詹承绪, 王承权 , 李近春 , 刘龙初 . (2006).永宁纳西族的阿注婚姻和母系家庭 (第 2版). 上海: 上海世纪出版集团.]
Zhang, H. Z. (2007). Introduction to modern women psychology. Beijing, China: China Archives Press House. [张海钟. (2007). 现代女性心理学导论 . 北京: 中国档案出
版社.]
Zhang, J. J., & Ma, L. J. (2011). On ultimate duty and its social psychological mechanism. Journal of South China Normal University (Social Science Edition), (6), 110–119.
[张积家 , 马利军 . (2011). 论终极责任及其心理机制 . 华南师范大学学报(社会科学版), (6), 110–119.]
Zhou, H. S. (2010). Without hisfather's country——Heavy light female male of matriarchal Mosuo (2nd ed.). Beijing, China: Guangming Daily Press.
周华山 . (2010). 无父无夫的国度 ?——重女不轻男的母系摩梭 (第 2版). 北京: 光明日报出版社.
The Azhu Relationship under the Sexual Union in Moso Matrilineal Society: Akin to Kinship or Friendship?
XIAO Erping1; ZHANG Jijia2; WANG Juan3 (1 Department of Psychology, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 311121, China) (2 Department of Psychology, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China) (3 Department of Education Science, Jiangsu Normal University, Xuzhou 221116, China)
Abstract
Azhu is a Moso word which describes the sexual life pattern among the Moso people, a matriarchal ethnic group living along the border of Yunnan and Sichuan provinces. Azhu relationship refers to a kind of interpersonal relationship between friendship and kinship. A Moso’s azhu is similar to a Han’s lover, both terms indicating a romantic nature. The aim of the current study was to explore the essence of the azhu relationship under the sexual union from a psychological perspective. Two experiments were conducted to investigate the emotional responses and the behavioral tendencies of four different relationships (kin, azhu/lover, friend, and stranger), addressing distinct domains for which kinship is known (such as incest avoidance and altruistic behavior) by comparing the Moso people with the Han people.
Fifty-eight Moso people and 61 Han people participated in Experiment 1. A 2 Ethnicity (Moso vs. Han) × 2 Gender (Male vs. Female) × 4 Relationship Type (Kin, Azhu/Lover, Friend, Stranger) mixed design was used. The participants’ emotional responses were rated in a Likert scale after imaging sexual intercourse with the four heterosexual relationship types respectively. Results in Experiment 1 showed that there was a remarkable ethnicity difference in incest avoidance. The Han people expressed a much stronger sense of disgust than the Moso people to sexual behavior with kin, while there were no significant differences in the degree of disgust caused by sexual behavior with non-kin between the Hans and the Mosos. The emotional responses caused by imaging sexual behavior with special objects differed between the two genders. Female participants’ negative emotions (including disgust) were much stronger than those of male participants’, while those of positive emotions (including romantic) were exactly the opposite. However, this kind of gender differences was non-significant regarding kinship.
Fifty Moso people and 98 Han people participated in Experiment 2. The design was similar to Experiment 1. A Likert scale was used to evaluate the participants’ willingness to perform an altruistic behavior to help a kin, azhu/lover, friend, and stranger respectively. The results indicated that the Moso people were more willing to perform selfless altruistic behaviors than the Han people to a kin, a friend or a stranger. However, the situation was the opposite when the azhu/lover was in danger. The differences were smaller among the Han people when rating the altruistic behaviors between kins versus those between lovers, while the differences were larger among the Moso people when rating the altruistic behaviors between kins versus those between azhus; The differences were smaller among the Moso people when rating the altruistic behaviors between azhus versus those between friends, while the differences were larger among the Han people when rating the altruistic behaviors between lovers and those between friends. There was a significant gender difference between the Hans and the Mosos towards the willingness to help their azhu/lover. Han males had a stronger willingness to perform altruistic behaviors than Han females, whereas Moso females had a stronger willingness to help their azhu than Moso males.
In general, the results in the current study showed that the Han people treated their lovers as kins while Moso people treated their azhus as friends on the psychological and behavioral level. The nature of the azhu relationship under the sexual union in the Moso society was a kind of non-kin friendship, which was fundamentally different from the couple relationship of mainstream society. Key words the Moso; sexual union; azhu relationship; sexual attraction; altruistic behavior
收稿日期: 2015-05-25
* 国家社会科学基金重大项目 (13&ZD155)、教育部人文社会科学研究项目青年基金项目成果 (12YJC850023)、杭州市哲学社会科学规划课题重点项目成果 (A13WH05)、中国人民大学科学研究基金 (中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助 )项目(14XNLQ05)、杭州师范大学人文社会科学振兴计划“望道青年学者激励项目” (RWWD1301)成果。通讯作者: 张积家, E-mail: zhangjj1955@163.com; 肖二平, E-mail: Sweetlemonxiao@163.com 注：张积家共同为第一作者。
www.psychspace.com心理学空间网
