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。     

先前错失选项的数量对不作为惯性的调节机制

在以往涉及不作为惯性的研究中,个体通常只是错失了1个先前选项.本研究旨在考察当之前错失了多个选项后,不作为惯性是否仍会出现,并深入探讨估价和后悔因素在不作为惯性产生或消失中的作用.结果发现,先前错失选项的数量对不作为惯性具有调节作用:当先前只错失了1个选项时,出现了不作为惯性,当先前已错失了两个选项时,不作为惯性消失了.中介分析发现,这一调节作用可被预期后悔所中介.结果表明,预期后悔是导致个体在错失多个选项后不作为惯性消失的主要原因.     

做会后悔还是不做会后悔?——自我调节模式对不作为惯性的影响

从消费者的不作为惯性反应差异出发,探讨运动模式和评估模式的消费者在错过第一次合意机会、面对第二次次优机会时购买可能性的差异及原因。通过3个研究发现,相比评估模式的消费者而言,运动模式的消费者具有更高的二次购买可能性。在自我调节模式影响次优购买可能性的过程中,预期后悔起到重要的中介作用。此外,研究还发现,当第二次次优机会中提供了与第一次机会中的产品类似但不同的替代产品时,运动模式和评估模式消费者之间的购买可能性差异消失了。     

行为决策中的后悔

后悔是行为决策领域中有关决策情感的最重要研究领域之一.后悔是一种基于认知的消极情感,当个体意识到或者想象出如果先前采取其他的行为,将产生更好的结果时,就会产生后悔情感.许多研究证据表明后悔将会影响人们的行为决策.本文简要回顾了后悔的定义和影响因素,结合研究者提出的不同后悔模型,从作为效应、后悔规避和不作为惯性等方面,具体介绍了后悔对决策行为的作用,并探讨了行为决策中后悔研究的未来发展方向.     

不作为惰性的影响机制:有中介的调节模型

本研究旨在考察前后机会比较对不作为惰性的影响,探索社会比较的调节作用以及预期作为后悔和价值评估的中介作用。本研究采用问卷法和实验法,以842名大学生为研究对象进行调查,采用Bootstrap方法对中介效应进行分析。结果显示:(1)社会比较在前后机会比较与不作为惰性之间的调节效应显著;(2)预期作为后悔和价值评估在前后机会比较与不作为惰性之间起中介作用。(3)社会比较的调节效应以预期作为后悔和价值评估为中介变量。     

道德困境决策中的忽略偏差:现象与测量

道德困境决策中的忽略偏差效应是指在道德困境中,当作为和不作为都会造成消极结果的情况下,个体认为作为导致的消极结果比不作为导致的消极结果更不道德,从而使人们在道德决策时更倾向于不作为的现象。由于传统道德决策研究范式存在义务论决策倾向性和一般性不作为反应倾向相混淆的局限,道德困境决策中的忽略偏差效应尚未做进一步探索。本文梳理了道德困境决策中忽略偏差效应的表现,通过CNI模型提出甄别和测量道德困境决策中忽略偏差效应的策略:创设研究情景; 分离不作为倾向性和忽略偏差效应; 综合探索忽略偏差效应的群体和个体特征。针对CNI模型的局限性,结合CAN算法和漂移扩散模型对未来的研究方向进行了展望。     

安于现状偏差的心理机制、影响因素及应用启示

安于现状偏差是指个体在决策时,倾向于不作为、维持当前或者以前的决策的一种现象。安于现状偏差包括内源的安于现状偏差与外源的安于现状偏差。目前研究者对这一现象的解释主要有两种:损失规避与后悔理论。安于现状偏差的影响因素主要包括备择项的数目、决策者的情绪以及认知与动机特征等。安于现状偏差有利于认识日常决策行为,而且在销售、管理与公共政策等实践领域有着重要的研究价值。未来的研究则需要从安于现状偏差与其他决策现象之间的关系,安于现状偏差的产生根源及其应用研究的拓展等方面来进一步探讨。     

作为效应的象征性与利益性影响因素:后悔理论的经济心理学分析

在许多有关后悔的研究中,作为效应是一个研究的热点.一些研究结果发现面对坏结果,作为之后产生的后悔程度大于不作为(Kahneman & Tversky, 1982; Landman, 1987).但是以往的研究很少考虑到具体的情境因素.本研究考察被试在象征性和利益性的情境中的行为选择以及后悔程度是否存在着差异.结果发现在象征性的情境中,被试倾向于选择作为(65.6%),而在利益性的情境中,被试则倾向于选择不作为(72.0%, χ2= 36.230, p= .000).由此可见,作为效应的产生具有一定的情境性.     

调节模式与社会参照点对延迟选择的影响

为进一步探讨延迟选择的影响因素,基于自我调节模式理论,以132名大学生为研究对象,通过问卷法和行为实验法探讨了预期后悔在调节模式对延迟选择影响的中介作用及社会参照点的调节效应.结果 显示:(1)不同调节模式个体的延迟选择倾向不同,相比于运动模式,评估模式的个体延迟选择倾向更高;(2)预期后悔在调节模式和延迟选择之间发挥...     

时间参照对绿色消费的影响：环保意识和产品环境怀疑的调节作用

绿色消费虽然受到越来越多的关注,但消费者的绿色承诺很难转化为实际的购买行为,出现了消费者的不作为现象。本研究试图探讨时间参照对消费者不作为的影响以及环保意识是否能够有效抑制这种不作为。研究发现,消费者在近期情境下对绿色产品的购买意愿低于远期,出现了绿色消费不作为现象,即个体更倾向于在将来而不是现在购买绿色产品。尤为重要的是,环保意识对消费者不作为的弱化作用受制于个体的产品环境怀疑：产品坏境怀疑较低时环保意识的弱化作用明显,而产品环境怀疑较高时环保意识的弱化作用则不存在。     

Inaction inertia

Inaction inertia occurs when bypassing an initial action opportunity has the effect of decreasing the likelihood that subsequent similar action opportunities will be taken. This overview of the inaction inertia literature demonstrates the impact of inaction inertia on decision making. Based on research on the causes of inaction inertia, we show that it is a multi-determined phenomenon, explained by both valuation and regret considerations. Moreover, we demonstrate how a sour grapes explanation of inaction inertia might integrate these two accounts. Furthermore, we explain when inaction inertia is most likely to occur and how it can be prevented. We conclude that the inaction inertia literature does not only add to our understanding of this intriguing phenomenon, but also contributes to related social psychological phenomena, such as the sunk cost effect, sequential decision making, decision avoidance (e.g., choice deferral, status quo bias, decisional conflict), and procrastination.     

The dark side of “doing the right thing”: regulatory mode predicts the inaction inertia effect

The inaction inertia effect refers to the idea that when people miss out on an initial opportunity, they are prone to stay inactive afterward. However, little is known about how personality relates to inaction inertia. The purpose of this research is to investigate the role of regulatory mode in the inaction inertia effect. Study 1 found that an assessment mode positively predicts inaction inertia while a locomotion mode is not related to inaction inertia. Study 2 replicated this finding in a different scenario. Study 3 found that priming assessment mode (compared with locomotion mode) predicts inaction inertia. Implications of how regulatory mode influences inaction inertia are discussed.     

Dealing with missed opportunities: Action vs. state orientation moderates inaction inertia

Inaction inertia refers to the effect that missing a more attractive opportunity decreases the likelihood to act on an attractive current opportunity in the same domain. We studied the influence of how people cope with negative decision outcomes (i.e., action vs. state orientation) on this inaction inertia effect. Experiment 1 used an experimental induction of action vs. state orientation and confirmed our prediction that state oriented people showed more inaction inertia than action oriented people. Experiment 2 replicated these results with a measure of chronic action orientation and showed a mediating effect of valuation of the current opportunity. Experiment 3 showed that temporal segregation of the current from the missed opportunity decreased inaction inertia effects for state oriented, but not for action oriented people. We discuss the implications of these results for the inaction inertia and action vs. state orientation literatures.     

The impact of different product formats on inaction inertia

ABSTRACT

The inaction inertia effect describes situations in which a person rejects an opportunity after having forgone a relatively superior opportunity. This study explores whether product format (hedonic vs. utilitarian) affects the inaction inertia effect. The authors build on previous findings that show comparisons of utilitarian benefits are easier than hedonic benefits, and hedonic consumption (vs. utilitarian consumption) usually generates greater pleasure. The authors propose that people show higher inaction inertia after they have missed a superior utilitarian consumption opportunity than after they have missed a superior hedonic consumption opportunity. This prediction was tested and supported in three different experiments. Moreover, the authors found that differences in comparability between products, rather than the hedonic pleasure, explain differences in inaction inertia effects. These findings contribute to the inaction inertia literature and marketing practice.     

Decoupling the past from the present attenuates inaction inertia

Inaction inertia is the phenomenon that one is not likely to act upon an attractive opportunity after having bypassed an even more attractive opportunity. We investigated the boundary conditions of this inaction inertia effect. Based on the mental accounting literature and the transaction decoupling literature we predicted and found in three experiments that tight coupling of the forgone to the current opportunity is a necessary condition for inaction inertia to occur. Inaction inertia decreased when information about the missed opportunity was ambiguous (Experiment 1), when the past opportunity required an extra step to obtain (Experiment 2) and when the past and present opportunity decreased in comparability (Experiment 3). The theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed in view of the literature on inaction inertia and on judgment and decision-making. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Inaction inertia,regret, and valuation: A closer look

Inaction inertia is the phenomenon that one is not likely to act on an attractive opportunity after having bypassed an even more attractive opportunity. So far, all published work has assumed a causal role for the emotion regret in this effect. In a series of 5 experiments we found no support for this regret explanation. In these experiments factors that influenced regret did not influence inaction inertia, and factors that influenced inaction inertia did not influence regret. In addition, in two experiments we found evidence that missing the initial opportunity leads to a devaluation of the later offer. We propose that, in some cases, regret may be a by-product of this devaluation, rather than a cause of inaction inertia.     

Coping with non‐purchase: Managing the stress of inaction regret

This research presents a framework based on coping theory to explain the different ways of managing the stress of regret for inaction. We theorize that primary appraisals of goal-relevance and secondary appraisals of reversibility affect how consumers cope with the stress of inaction regret resulting in different behavioral outcomes. Prior research has focused on two outcomes of regret for inaction—inaction inertia and dissonance reduction—that result in the decreased intent to avail of a similar future opportunity. This research proposes that these are not inevitable outcomes, but rather coping responses. Further, if the forgone opportunity is appraised to be goal-relevant and reversible, consumers engage in active coping that results in increased behavioral intent.