The relations between early-life stress and risk, time, and prosocial preferences in adulthood: A meta-analytic review
The relations between early-life stress and risk, time, and prosocial preferences in adulthood: A meta-analytic review
复制标题
早期生活压力与成年期风险、时间和亲社会偏好之间的关系：荟萃分析综述
DOI：
10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2020.09.001
复制
发表时间：
2020-09
影响因子：
5.1
通讯作者：
Yu Kou
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Junhui Wu;Zhen Guo;Xinyun Gao;Yu Kou
这项荟萃分析综述旨在通过量化早期生活压力与风险、时间和亲社会偏好之间的关联，并测试这些关联的边界条件，来解决先前研究中的混合结果。我们对 123 篇文章进行了荟萃分析，报告了 199,019 名成年人中的 867 个效应量，从生活史角度、敏感性角度和不确定性管理角度来测试关于早年压力如何与风险、时间和亲社会偏好相关的不同预测。首先，我们发现相对较小的效应量表明，早年压力与更大的冒险行为（r= .123）、更多的当前取向（r= .126）和更少的亲社会性（r= -.085）相关，并且在当前压力情况下，它与当前取向的正相关性更强。其次，这些观察到的关联对于早期生活压力的严酷性和不可预测性方面并没有显着变化。值得注意的是，不同类型偏好测量的调节分析仅揭示了早期生活压力与风险、时间和亲社会偏好的自我报告测量之间关联的总体模式。相比之下，早期生活压力与通过假设选择任务或实验室行为任务测量的风险偏好或亲社会偏好没有显着相关。总而言之，虽然结果的总体模式支持生活史的观点，但由于不同偏好测量结果的差异以及结果中潜在的发表偏差，需要谨慎的解释。需要更多的预先注册的研究来测试通过任意基于实验室的任务测量的偏好在多大程度上捕获现实世界的行为，并提高基于实验室的测量的生态有效性。
This meta-analytic review aims to address the mixed findings in previous research by quantifying the associations between early-life stress and risk, time, and prosocial preferences, and testing the boundary conditions of these associations. We meta-analyze 123 articles reporting 867 effect sizes among 199,019 adults to test different predictions from a life history perspective, a sensitization perspective, and an uncertainty management perspective about how early-life stress is associated with risk, time, and prosocial preferences. First, we find relatively small effect sizes indicating that early-life stress is associated with greater risk taking (r= .123), more present orientation (r= .126), and less prosociality (r= -.085), and its positive association with present orientation is stronger in currently stressful situations. Second, these observed associations do not vary significantly for harshness and unpredictability dimensions of early-life stress. Notably, moderation analyses across different types of preference measures only reveal an overall pattern of associations of early-life stress with self-report measures of risk, time, and prosocial preferences. By contrast, early-life stress is not significantly associated with risk preference or prosocial preference measured with hypothetical choice tasks or laboratory behavior tasks. Taken together, although the overall pattern of results supports a life history perspective, a cautious interpretation is warranted by the variation in the results across different preference measures and potential publication bias in the results. More pre-registered studies are needed to test the extent to which preferences measured with arbitrary laboratory-based tasks capture real-world behaviors and to increase the ecological validity of laboratory-based measures.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
29.3
作者：
Seger M. Breugelmans;Arnoud Plantinga;M. Zeelenberg;O. Poluektova;Maria Efremova
通讯作者：
Seger M. Breugelmans;Arnoud Plantinga;M. Zeelenberg;O. Poluektova;Maria Efremova
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Welsh MC;Peterson E;Jameson MM
通讯作者：
Jameson MM
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Kogan SM;Cho J;Barnum S;Barton A;Hicks MR;Brown GL
通讯作者：
Brown GL
影响因子：
11.3
作者：
Valderrama J;Miranda R
通讯作者：
Miranda R
影响因子：
4.8
作者：
J. A. Schwartz;E. Wright;B. A. Valgardson
通讯作者：
J. A. Schwartz;E. Wright;B. A. Valgardson