PDF(1581 KB)
PDF(1581 KB)
PDF(1581 KB)
共知乃共情、共通与共识的前提：数字交往的心理语言学视角
Shared Knowledge as Antecedent of Empathetic Dialogue and Reciprocal Understanding: Theoretical Promises and Practical Implications
流动性、圈层化的数字时代，多元行动者理性与情绪杂糅下的无序交往，消弭了公共与私人的边界，基于理性的传统交往理论难以对当下数字网络节点式的交往现状做出有力解释。从情感层面的共情出发，实现多元主体连接，并推动对话和协商的实现，达到“共通”和互惠性理解，是目前较为流行的思考方向。然而，即便是“人同此心、心同此理”，也须有前置的“同”，共情的产生并非是自然而然的，需要有共同知识作为基础。本文试图融合心理语言学 “共同基础”（common ground）和主要来源于哲学、逻辑学并广泛应用于认知语言学、心理学以及博弈论的“互知” （mutual knowledge）理论， 用“共知”（shared knowledge）来涵盖这两个理论的主要内涵，借此探究“共知”，包括“基础共知”和“新兴共知”，在数字交往中的前置作用，并讨论经验感召、语言表达和文化认同对共知形成的影响。在此基础上，提出一个在当下及未来数字交往过程中，多元主体之间实现共通、共情，乃至达成共识的，有理论价值和实践意义的切入点。相较于传统的交往理论框架如“主体间性”“交往理性”等，“共知”在数字交往的生态中具有更强的适应性、解释力以及实用性。
The rise of social and networked communication has increasingly blurred the boundaries between public and private spheres. The interplay of rationality and emotion among diverse actors posed significant challenges to traditional social and communication theories, which are largely based on the assumption that consensus and agreement emerge from human reasoning and rationality. As a result, the goal of communication has shifted from consensus-building to fostering connectedness and reciprocal understanding, with empathy conceptualized as a key factor in facilitating meaningful connections, dialogue, and understanding. We argue that empathy does not arise spontaneously. Instead, the emergence of empathy requires specific antecedent factors as prerequisites. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of common ground and common knowledge from the field of psycholinguistics and game theory, we use shared knowledge to encompass the key connotations of both theories. We explore the antecedent role of shared knowledge, both foundational and emergent, in digital interactions, and discuss the impact of experiential appeal and linguistic expression and cultural identity on the formation of shared knowledge. On this basis, an entry point with theoretical value and practical significance is proposed for common and reciprocal understanding and even consensus in the present and future. Compared with traditional theoretical frameworks of interaction, such as intersubjectivity and rationality of interaction, shared knowledge is more adaptable, explanatory and practical in the ecology of digital interaction.
共同基础 / 基础性共知 / 新兴共知 / 共情 / 数字交往
Common ground / basic shared knowledge / emerging shared knowledge / empathy / digital communication
| [1] |
陈鼓应(2007). 《庄子今注今译》. 商务印书馆.
|
| [2] |
陈力丹, 霍仟(2013). 互联网传播中的长尾理论与小众传播. 《西南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版)》,(4),148-152+246.
|
| [3] |
陈龙(2019). “借题发挥”:一种中国特色的网络舆论话语生成模式. 《新闻与传播研究》,(12),67-83+127.
|
| [4] |
方宝(2014). 模因现象的语言经济学阐释. 《河北联合大学学报(社会科学版)》,(1),115-119.
|
| [5] |
哈贝马斯(1985/1994). 《交往行动理论》(第一卷)(洪佩郁,蔺菁译). 重庆出版社.
|
| [6] |
海德格尔(1927/2018). 《存在与时间》(陈嘉映,王庆节译)(第2版). 商务印书馆.
|
| [7] |
胡塞尔(1982/1988). 《欧洲科学危机和超验现象学》(张庆熊译). 上海译文出版社.
|
| [8] |
胡翼青(2024). 我们该如何理解“数字共通”:基于媒介哲学的批判. 《现代出版》,(2),35-44.
|
| [9] |
罗一凡, 单波(2023). 第三文化建构:面向跨文化关系的创造及其可能路径. 《跨文化传播研究》,(2),115-141.
|
| [10] |
单波(2010). 《跨文化传播的问题与可能性》. 武汉大学出版社.
|
| [11] |
隋岩, 揭其涛(2024). 群聚传播的凝结空间生产与价值指向. 《南昌大学学报(人文社科版)》,(2),130-140.
|
| [12] |
维特根斯坦(1974/1996). 《逻辑哲学论》(贺绍甲译). 商务印书馆.
|
| [13] |
维特根斯坦(1951/1996). 《哲学研究》(李步楼译). 商务印书馆.
|
| [14] |
吴飞, 傅正科(2023). “数字共通”:理解数字时代社会交往的新假设. 《新闻与传播研究》,(6),22-35+126-127.
|
| [15] |
周妍(2024). 技术、传播与社会表达:中国网络语言的三十年变迁. 《西北大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,(3),174-184.
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
Systems as diverse as genetic networks or the World Wide Web are best described as networks with complex topology. A common property of many large networks is that the vertex connectivities follow a scale-free power-law distribution. This feature was found to be a consequence of two generic mechanisms: (i) networks expand continuously by the addition of new vertices, and (ii) new vertices attach preferentially to sites that are already well connected. A model based on these two ingredients reproduces the observed stationary scale-free distributions, which indicates that the development of large networks is governed by robust self-organizing phenomena that go beyond the particulars of the individual systems.
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
Empathy is the ability to experience and understand what others feel without confusion between oneself and others. Knowing what someone else is feeling plays a fundamental role in interpersonal interactions. In this paper, we articulate evidence from social psychology and cognitive neuroscience, and argue that empathy involves both emotion sharing (bottom-up information processing) and executive control to regulate and modulate this experience (top-down information processing), underpinned by specific and interacting neural systems. Furthermore, awareness of a distinction between the experiences of the self and others constitutes a crucial aspect of empathy. We discuss data from recent behavioral and functional neuroimaging studies with an emphasis on the perception of pain in others, and highlight the role of different neural mechanisms that underpin the experience of empathy, including emotion sharing, perspective taking, and emotion regulation.
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
The authors propose that people adopt others' perspectives by serially adjusting from their own. As predicted, estimates of others' perceptions were consistent with one's own but differed in a manner consistent with serial adjustment (Study 1). Participants were slower to indicate that another's perception would be different from--rather than similar to--their own (Study 2). Egocentric biases increased under time pressure (Study 2) and decreased with accuracy incentives (Study 3). Egocentric biases also increased when participants were more inclined to accept plausible values encountered early in the adjustment process than when inclined to reject them (Study 4). Finally, adjustments tend to be insufficient, in part, because people stop adjusting once a plausible estimate is reached (Study 5).((c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved)
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
Husserl. (1950/1960). Cartesian meditations: An introduction to phenomenology. (D. Cairns, Trans.). Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
|
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
|
| [35] |
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
|
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
|
| [47] |
|
| [48] |
|
| [49] |
While computer-mediated communication use and research are proliferating rapidly, findings offer contrasting images regarding the interpersonal character of this technology. Research trends over the history of these media are reviewed with observations across trends suggested so as to provide integrative principles with which to apply media to different circumstances. First, the notion that the media reduce personal influences—their impersonal effects—is reviewed. Newer theories and research are noted explaining normative “interpersonal” uses of the media. From this vantage point, recognizing that impersonal communication is sometimes advantageous, strategies for the intentional depersonalization of media use are inferred, with implications for Group Decision Support Systems effects. Additionally, recognizing that media sometimes facilitate communication that surpasses normal interpersonal levels, a new perspective on “hyperpersonal” communication is introduced. Subprocesses are discussed pertaining to receivers, senders, channels, and feedback elements in computer-mediated communication that may enhance impressions and interpersonal relations.
|
1. Common ground 译为“共同基础”而不是“共同立场”，考虑“共同立场”政治意味强，容易造成对理论的误解。同理，shared/common knowledge 译为“共知”而非“共识”。
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
