社会杂志 ›› 2013, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (4): 176-192.

• 论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

强制结构理论及实验检验

  

  1. 作者1:刘军 哈尔滨工程大学社会学系;作者2:David Willer,美国南卡罗来纳大学社会学系;作者3:Pamela Emanuelson,美国北达科他州立大学社会学与人类学系
  • 出版日期:2013-07-20 发布日期:2013-07-20
  • 通讯作者: 作者1:刘军 哈尔滨工程大学社会学系,E-mail: liujunry@163.com;
  • 作者简介:作者1:刘军 哈尔滨工程大学社会学系;作者2:David Willer,美国南卡罗来纳大学社会学系;作者3:Pamela Emanuelson,美国北达科他州立大学社会学 与人类学系
  • 基金资助:

    本文受国家社会科学基金项目(13BSH054)和哈尔滨工程大学中央高校基本科研基金项目(HEUCF20121309)资助

Coercive Structures: Theory and Testing

  1. Author 1: LIU Jun, Department of Sociology, Harbin Engineering University) E-mail: liujunry@163.com;Author 2: David Willer, Department of Sociology, University of South Carolina);Author 3: Pamela Emanuelson,Department of Sociology and Anthropology, North Dakota State University
  • Online:2013-07-20 Published:2013-07-20
  • Contact: Author 1: LIU Jun, Department of Sociology, Harbin Engineering University) E-mail: liujunry@163.com;
  • About author:Author 1: LIU Jun, Department of Sociology, Harbin Engineering University) E-mail: liujunry@163.com;Author 2: David Willer, Department of Sociology, University of South Carolina);Author 3: Pamela Emanuelson,Department of Sociology and Anthropology, North Dakota State University
  • Supported by:

    This research was supported by National Social Science Foundation of China (13BSH054) and Harbin Engineering University Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (HEUCF20121309).

摘要: 学术界对强制关系的研究较少,尽管它无处不在。本文基于要素论探讨强制结构的含义、分类及模型,重点探讨了间接强制结构的效应。间接强制是涉及至少三个行动者的一类“不给钱就制裁,给钱就‘保护’你”的结构关系。实验研究结果表明,在边界条件内,间接强制结构与直接强制结构一样有效力,即有类似的强制幅度和力度,二者都使强制者获得最大的剥夺率。本文最后讨论了影响强制效果的因素,包括强制者的贪欲与策略、强—强联盟及受制者联盟的效应等。

关键词: 强制, 社会网络, 三方关系, 网络交换论

Abstract: Though they are found in almost every society, too little attention has been paid to coercive relations. Based on Elementary Theory, this paper discusses the meaning, classification and effects of coercive relations and structures. In coercive relations the threat, for example “Your money or your life”, is intended by the coercer to extract value from the coercees. The dyadic coercive relation and centralized coercive structures are differentiated, with the latter being further divided into the coercer central structure and coercee central structure. Studies have found that coercer in the former structure may exercise more power on the coercees, while coercees in the latter structure could negotiate with the coercer and will be coerced less. Secondly, strongcoercive structures are differentiated from the weakcoercive structures. In the former, coercers may exercise the maximum level of power over coercees. Thirdly, this paper differentiates direct coercion from indirect coercion, with the latter involving at least three actors. Based on that, models of direct coercion and indirect coercion were built but the discussion was directed at the effects of the indirect coercive structure in comparison with those of direct coercion in terms of strength and extension. The models were tested. Experimental results have indicated that direct coercive structure and indirect coercive structure have the same power effects under boundary conditions: they are equally effective in extent and strength. In both structures coercers earn maximum payoffs. Finally, the paper discusses factors affecting coercion, including information, coercer’s desire and tactics, coercers’ coalition, and coercees’ coalition.

Key words: coercion, social network, triadic relationship, network exchange theory