失望情绪在不作为惯性产生中的作用

以往不作为惯性领域的研究发现, 当个体没有获得先前更优机会是源于他人或外界等不可控因素时, 个体仍会倾向于继续放弃当前次优机会, 且后悔情绪未能对此进行解释。本研究认为失望情绪适用于解释此种情况下的不作为惯性, 或可成为后悔情绪解释的有效补充。本研究通过两个实验首次探讨了失望情绪在不作为惯性产生中的作用。结果发现, 各自变量对失望情绪（体验失望和预期失望）和作为可能性均具有一致的影响力, 且预期失望在不作为惯性的产生中具有中介作用。本研究表明, 失望情绪可能也是导致不作为惯性的一个重要因素。     

美国投资心理学理论的进展

美国投资心理学的研究产生于20世纪80年代。西方的许多经济学家在研究投资活动过程中发现,微观经济学和金融学的许多数学模型,不能很好地解释和预测现实中的投资活动,开始加强对个体在投资决策中的心理研究,在Amos Tversky、Daniel Kahneman、Richard Thaler、Robert J.Shiller等一大批经济学家和投资心理学家的努力下,取得了丰硕的成果。为此,美国普林斯顿大学的投资心理学家Kahneman荣获2002年度的诺贝尔经济学奖。文章介绍了西方投资心理学的几个重要理论,即过度反应理论(overreaction theory)、视野理论(prospect theory)、后悔理论(regret theory)及对投资者的过度自信理论（overconfidence theory）。     

认知资源：解释社会助长效应的新视角

Zajonc和Baron分别提出社会唤醒理论和分心-冲突理论对社会助长效应进行解释,但仍存在一定的不足。研究在两种理论的基础上提出一种基于认知资源的解释观点。通过行为实验和脑电实验对这一观点进行验证,结果发现： （1）行为数据符合社会唤醒理论假设（2）简单任务组比复杂任务组诱发更高的N1波幅。（3）简单任务下,有人在场诱发更高的N1波幅;复杂任务下,有人在与无人组诱发的N1无显著差异。结果提示：他人在场通过改变个体的注意力投入来影响任务的完成效果。研究很好的解释了社会唤醒理论和分心-冲突理论无法解释的盲区,为社会助长效应的研究提供了一个新的视角。     

儿童科学概念的认知发展

综述了作者在儿童科学概念认知领域的研究,其中包括儿童的朴素生物学、朴素物理学认知及其与心理理论发展关系的研究。作者研究了儿童在生命科学领域的自发概念,包括对生长、衰老、疾病和死亡等生命现象的认知,探查儿童对日常生活中物理学概念（如力等）的朴素认知,力图发现儿童早期认知中的潜力,同时探明他们相应的错误概念,并采用教育干预实验,促进儿童科学概念的转化。还探查影响儿童科学概念发展的因素,包括外部教育条件以及个体认知能力（如心理理论发展水平,推理能力等）。研究发现,儿童在接受正规的科学教育前就对人类重要的科学领域形成了自己的“朴素理论”,他们用这种理论来解释现实世界的现象。作者主张儿童的科学教育（包括健康教育）应该以儿童的“朴素理论”为基础,从而真正做到因材施教     

短期后悔与长期后悔的差异:三种不同的解释

介绍了解释短期后悔和长期后悔在支持“做（状态改变）-不做（状态继续）”规律上差异的三种理论：Gilovich 和Medvec 的后悔的时间性模型、Kahneman 的两情绪特性说以及张结海提出的后悔的一致性模型。     

回忆过去和想象将来时谈及他人与心理理论的关系

为考察心理理论与回忆过去、想象将来中内容的关系,153名青少年两周内完成了情景记忆和心理理论等任务。控制了智力、言语能力和执行功能后,线性回归分析发现青少年回忆过去和想象将来时“谈及他人”与心理理论有显著关联（Aajusted R^2=51．6％,F（9,143）=19．00,P〈0．001）,不同群体间心理理论的差异也可由其谈及他人数量不同来解释。结果提示。与西方谈论心理状态不同,中国文化下回忆过去和想象将来时“谈及他人”可能是促进心理理论发展的机制。     

认知老化与脑：HAROLD模型之争

HAROLD模型（Hemispheric Asymmetry Reduction in Older Adults）是指与年轻人相比,老年人在完成某些认知任务时大脑激活呈现出非对称性减弱的现象。该模型自提出以来就引发了很多质疑和研究,近几年来又有一系列的研究分别从不同角度提供了支持该模型的证据,它们包括记忆研究领域、抑制研究领域、语言认知研究领域、感觉动作研究领域和脑神经研究领域。同时也存在明显不支持该模型的研究证据,主要体现为对补偿说的批驳。通过对支持该模型和不支持该模型两方面脑成像研究成果的文献分析,发现HAROLD模型可能是一个任务特异性模型;除补偿说之外,还有其他可能的观点能够解释功能性脑成像的年龄差异;对脑激活定义的进一步明确化有助于澄清相关的争论     

后悔的一致性模型:理论和证据

重新检验Ｇｉｌｏｖｉｃｈ和Ｍｅｄｖｅｃ的后悔时间性模型。该模型认为,与假设思维有关的短期后悔的研究结果相反,人们日常生活中最大的后悔（长期后悔）多是“不做”而不是“做”的后悔。该文认为这一理论上的矛盾来自于双方对“做／不做”概念以及“做－不做”规律适用范围的不同理解。该研究使用这一新的分类方法,发现和短期后悔一样,至少一半的长期后悔来自于“状态改变”的后悔。这此基础上提出后悔的一致性模型,认为长期     

基于预期理论的参照依赖

参照依赖是指个体基于某一参照点对得失价值进行判断:参照点之上,个体感受为收益,反之即为损失.参照依赖现象广泛存在于生活中的各种领域.当前,对参照依赖心理机制的解释主要有预期理论、后悔理论和三阶段参照点理论.参照依赖的影响因素主要包括经验、情绪状态、文化、目标和认知对象的特点等.未来的研究应主要集中于参照依赖的产生根源,深入探讨参照依赖的神经机制,加强动态参照点、多重参照点以及群体中参照依赖现象的研究.     

影响决策的情感因素——后悔理论的研究述评

情感因素在决策中起着重要的作用。本文对决策中最重要的情感因素——后悔因素的研究发展及其成果做了归纳总结,同时也将一些零散的发现整合在一起,使之更加系统化。后悔情绪对决策的影响作用不容忽视,作为决策理论之一的后悔理论在决策理论中的重要地位日益凸显出来。未来的研究将仍旧主要集中在其对决策的影响方面。后悔理论成为理性决策的一个可替代理论,已为时不远。     

What we regret most... and why

Which domains in life produce the greatest potential for regret, and what features of those life domains explain why? Using archival and laboratory evidence, the authors show that greater perceived opportunity within life domains evokes more intense regret. This pattern is consistent with previous publications demonstrating greater regret stemming from high rather than low opportunity or choice. A meta-analysis of 11 regret ranking studies revealed that the top six biggest regrets in life center on (in descending order) education, career, romance, parenting, the self, and leisure. Study Set 2 provided new laboratory evidence that directly linked the regret ranking to perceived opportunity. Study Set 3 ruled out an alternative interpretation involving framing effects. Overall, these findings show that people's biggest regrets are a reflection of where in life they see their largest opportunities; that is, where they see tangible prospects for change, growth, and renewal.     

A Theory of Regret Regulation 1.1

We use this opportunity to respond to the issues raised by Inman (2007), and Roese, Summerville, and Fessel (2007) by addressing four broad topics that embrace the most important comments on our regret regulation theory. These topics are the feeling‐is‐for‐doing approach on which regret regulation theory rests, the importance of emotion specificity, factors that modulate the intensity of regret, and the focus on action, inaction and choice in the elicitation of regret. Together this results in a first update, version 1.1.     

Regret,Remorse and the Twilight Perspective

I examine the ‘momentous’ choices that one makes early in life – about career or spouse, for example – and I ask what it means to regret such choices at the end of one’s life (in one’s twilight). I argue that such regrets are almost meaningless because of the difficulty of imaginatively accessing a much earlier self. I then contrast long-term regret to remorse, and argue that the two are qualitatively different experiences because remorse involves another person as victim.     

Regret and quality of life across the adult life span: the influence of disengagement and available future goals

Two studies examined the associations between life regrets and indicators of quality of life across the adult life span. Given that opportunities to undo regrets decline with age, regret intensity was expected to be inversely associated with subjective well-being and health among older adults. In addition, the research explored protective factors that have the potential to reduce older adults' regret intensity. It was suggested that being disengaged from undoing the consequences of regrets and having many future goals available may reduce older adults' intensity of regret and thereby contribute to a better quality of life. Across both studies, the findings demonstrate that older adults perceived reduced opportunities to undo the consequences of their regrets and that regret intensity predicted a reduced quality of life only among older adults. Furthermore, the findings support the adaptive value of disengagement and available future goals for managing life regrets in older adults.     

Is regret for inaction relatively self‐enhancing?

Previous accounts of regret suggest that people report greater regret for inaction than for action because the former is longer lasting and more painful than the latter. We suggest instead that the tendency for people's greatest regrets to concern inaction more than action may be due to the relatively self‐enhancing nature of regrets for inaction. In Study 1 we asked people to think about their greatest recent regret and to code it as being due to action or inaction. In Study 2 participants described their greatest regret from across their entire life. In both studies we observed an inaction effect only amongst individuals high in self‐esteem (HSE). In Study 2 we found that the inaction effect was confined to HSE people whose greatest regret was personal in nature. These results support the claim that regret for inaction is relatively self‐enhancing and suggest that the inaction effect found in real‐life regrets may be due, in part at least, to the self‐enhancement goals of HSE individuals. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Regret as autobiographical memory

We apply an autobiographical memory framework to the study of regret. Focusing on the distinction between regrets for specific and general events we argue that the temporal profile of regret, usually explained in terms of the action–inaction distinction, is predicted by models of autobiographical memory. In two studies involving participants in their sixties we demonstrate a reminiscence bump for general, but not for specific regrets. Recent regrets were more likely to be specific than general in nature. Coding regrets as actions/inactions revealed that general regrets were significantly more likely to be due to inaction while specific regrets were as likely to be due to action as to inaction. In Study 2 we also generalised all of these findings to a group of participants in their 40s. We re-interpret existing accounts of the temporal profile of regret within the autobiographical memory framework, and outline the practical and theoretical advantages of our memory-based distinction over traditional decision-making approaches to the study of regret.     

"If I had it to do over again...": midlife review, midcourse corrections, and women's well-being in midlife

Regrets about early adult life choices, expressed in midlife, are examined as a source of motivation for life changes in later midlife in 2 samples of women. Replicated findings with longitudinal data indicate that regret motivates goal setting but is not associated with actually making desired life changes. In both samples, women who had regrets about early adult life choices but did not make relevant life changes were lower in later well-being than both women with regrets who did make such changes and women without regrets. Compared with women who transformed regrets into life changes, women who did not were lower in effective instrumentality and higher in rumination, though they did not appear to face more barriers to change. Analyses with longitudinal data indicated that both rumination and effective instrumentality mediated the relationship between regret and well-being for women who did not translate regret into life changes.     

Regret as autobiographical memory

We apply an autobiographical memory framework to the study of regret. Focusing on the distinction between regrets for specific and general events we argue that the temporal profile of regret, usually explained in terms of the action–inaction distinction, is predicted by models of autobiographical memory. In two studies involving participants in their sixties we demonstrate a reminiscence bump for general, but not for specific regrets. Recent regrets were more likely to be specific than general in nature. Coding regrets as actions/inactions revealed that general regrets were significantly more likely to be due to inaction while specific regrets were as likely to be due to action as to inaction. In Study 2 we also generalised all of these findings to a group of participants in their 40s. We re-interpret existing accounts of the temporal profile of regret within the autobiographical memory framework, and outline the practical and theoretical advantages of our memory-based distinction over traditional decision-making approaches to the study of regret.