Seeing is Knowing: On the Predictive Accuracy of Self‐ and Informant Reports for Prosocial and Moral Behaviours

Under certain circumstances, well‐known others (so‐called informants) may possess unique insights into targets' personality traits beyond the targets' self‐views. Specifically, as proposed by the self–other knowledge asymmetry model, an incremental predictive ability of informants is most likely for traits and corresponding behaviours that are clearly visible to others and highly evaluative in nature. In two studies, we provide an empirical test of this proposition and extend prior research to one of the most important domains of interpersonal interaction: prosocial and moral behaviours. Specifically, we investigate the unique predictive power of informant reports in trait Honesty–Humility for fairness in the dictator game and dishonesty in a cheating paradigm. Importantly, while both these classes of behaviour are highly evaluative in nature, only fairness is clearly visible to others. Correspondingly, in line with the self–other knowledge asymmetry model, our results reveal unique predictive accuracy of informant reports for fairness. For dishonesty, by contrast, there was no conclusive evidence for incremental predictive power of informant reports. This implies that informants may indeed provide valuable information beyond targets' self‐reports on trait aspects driving fair behaviour, but that targets themselves are their own best experts when it comes to judging trait aspects driving dishonest behaviour. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Personality Psychology     

情绪对跨期决策的影响

近年来, 情绪对跨期决策的影响逐渐成为一个新的研究趋势。根据情绪发生于跨期决策过程中的时间, 可以将其分为决策前情绪、决策中情绪和决策后情绪。目前关于情绪与跨期决策的研究, 尤其是决策前情绪影响跨期决策的研究, 大多还只是停留在揭示现象的阶段, 较少有研究直接验证其中的影响机制。综合运用行为实验和神经影像学的手段从认知过程和决策过程揭示情绪影响跨期决策的行为机制和神经机制, 将有助于加深对跨期决策心理机制的理解, 并帮助人们更好地利用和控制情绪以做出更满意的决策。未来研究还需加强研究的深度和生态效度, 如考察动态情绪、日常情绪和复杂情绪对跨期决策的影响, 并在情绪干预方面进行更多的尝试和探索。     

风险条件下的跨期选择

跨期选择是指对发生在未来不同时间点上的结果做出权衡的决策过程。由于大部分跨期选择的情景都处于某种风险之中, 把风险变量纳入跨期选择的研究中则至为关键。针对以往研究在研究范围、理论构建、现实意义等诸方面的不足, 本研究拟采用实验室实验与纸笔测验相结合的方法, 深入揭示高、中、低三种概率水平下风险对跨期选择的影响特征, 探索其发生的机制、各类经典效应的大小。在此基础上, 根据全国不同地区的大样本调查结果, 了解各地区风险条件下跨期选择的差异及其与本地宏观经济指标(如, 消费者物价指数)的关联, 进而探讨研究的现实意义。本研究期望对风险条件下的跨期选择做出系统、全面的科学探索, 并为国家相关部门制定政策提供有价值的参考。     

How probable is probably? It depends on whom you're talking about

Two studies tested whether people interpreted verbal chance terms in a self‐serving manner. Participants read statements describing the likelihood of events in their own future and in the future of a randomly chosen other. They interpreted the chance terms numerically. Chance terms were interpreted as denoting a higher probability when they were used to describe the likelihood of pleasant events in one's own future than when they were used to describe the likelihood of pleasant events in someone else's future (Study 1). Similarly, chance terms were interpreted as denoting a lower probability when they were used to describe the likelihood of unpleasant events in one's own future than when they were used to describe the likelihood of unpleasant events in someone else's future (Studies 1 and 2). These differences occurred primarily when the risk statements were threatening. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

跨期选择的性质探索

跨期选择指人们对发生在不同时间点的价值做出的权衡与决策。大量研究证明, 跨期选择中人们存在普遍的时间折扣倾向, 即将未来的价值折扣后与当前价值进行权衡。跨期选择研究不仅与人类心智的起源与机制等基础科学问题密切相关, 也关系到国家公共政策的制定等现实问题。本项目拟采用实验室研究和大规模问卷调查结合的方法, 深入探索跨期选择的本质。一方面, 采用实验室研究法探讨影响跨期选择的重要因素, 以探索：(1) 跨期选择的效价及其与价值数量、延迟时间的交互作用及其心理机制; (2) 跨期选择中是否存在领域特异性及其心理机制; 另一方面, 通过全国范围的调查, 从而：(1) 建立中国城镇居民时间折扣率的常模; (2) 测量不同类型人群的时间折扣率, 以探讨跨期选择的性质与内涵。项目研究结果将有利于加深学界对跨期选择现象的理解。     

Why Don't People Change? A Psychoanalytic Perspective

From a psychoanalytic perspective, a central reason that people do not easily change is their fear of the dangers that they believe, at some level, change entails. These dangers include relinquishment of infantile wishes and fantasies, anxiety that would be experienced were defenses weakened, guilt, fantasies that change would harm a parental figure or threaten a vital relationship. Other factors that prevent change and maintain the sameness of behavior include defenses, unconscious pathogenic beliefs, devotion and loyalty to early figures, stable internal working models of self, other, and prototypic interactions, and emitting cues that elicit responses from others that confirm these working models. Finally, 1 discuss some selective psychoanalytic research on therapeutic change.     

动机冲突影响混合跨期决策：趋近-回避动机理论视角

组织与个人面临的许多决策,既无纯粹获益,也无纯粹损失,往往需要同时对未来不同时间点的损益加以权衡,这类损益兼具的决策称为混合跨期决策。过往研究通常沿用纯粹获益或损失跨期决策的理论框架,缺乏与混合跨期决策相匹配的理论建构和决策过程探索。基于此,本研究从趋近-回避动机理论出发,探索动机冲突影响混合跨期决策的过程机制。研究1拟探讨混合跨期决策中动机冲突特点,及其与决策行为之间的关系。研究2则计划分别操纵影响动机冲突程度的内源性因素(得失金额的相对差异程度)和外源性因素(资源有限程度),试图揭示动机冲突程度与混合跨期决策之间的因果链条。研究3拟采用鼠标追踪技术,基于决策过程指标进一步探索动机冲突影响混合跨期决策的过程机制。我们预期该研究结果有利于从动机冲突视角揭示并建构混合跨期决策的作用机制,同时也将为涉及混合跨期情境的企业管理和个体消费决策提供科学依据。     

得失不对称：跨期选择中自我-他人决策差异

采用跨期选择任务范式,考察得失情境下自我–他人决策差异。结果发现：（1）为自己决策比为他人决策更偏好于选择即刻选项;（2）损失情境比获益情境下更偏好于选择即刻选项;（3）获益情境下为自己决策与为他人决策在选择即刻选项上不存在显著差异,而损失情境下为自己决策比为他人决策更偏好于选择即刻选项,表明得失情境下自我–他人决策差异存在不对称性。     

跨期选择中的反常现象及其心理机制

时间折现是跨期选择研究的核心问题。指数折现效用模型（DU模型）是描述时间折现现象的基本模型。跨期选择的实验研究中发现的大量违背DU模型的反常现象表明,DU模型并不能很好地解释人们在跨期选择中的真实行为。文章从时间知觉、建构水平、参照点和价值函数、情绪激活、情绪麻木、期待效用等角度探讨了造成各种反常现象的心理机制,并提出了值得进一步研究的方向和问题。     

时间框架对决策的影响

时间是影响决策偏好一致性的重要因素,时间框架与行为决策之间的相互关系是决策科学领域关沣的重要问题.本研究采用实验方法,运用跨时选择研究范式对延迟决策和提前决策进行对比研究.实验结果表明,时间框架对跨时选样产生显著影响;同一时间距离条件下,提前框架下的时间折扣低于延迟框架下的时间折扣,即存在时间维度的框架效应.     

How do we evaluate future gambles? Experimental evidence on path dependency in risky intertemporal choice

This study reports three experiments which demonstrate path dependency in risky intertemporal choice. Consider a lottery to be resolved and paid in a future time period. One can obtain the present value of this lottery in three different ways: (1) eliciting directly the present certainty equivalent (CE) of the future lottery (direct path); (2) eliciting the future CE and then discounting this amount to the present (risk‐time path); and (3) eliciting the present value of the risky prospect and then determining the CE of this current lottery (time‐risk path). Standard rational choice models such as the discounted expected utility model, assume a multiplicative model, where all three methods mentioned above would yield the same value. We conducted three studies to examine if this is the case: Experiments 1 and 2 were based on a set of matching‐task questions and Experiment 3 used a process‐tracing design to analyze the natural sequence of decision making by the subjects. These three studies show that the evaluation of future gambles is path‐dependent. The present values elicited under the time‐risk and direct paths are, on average, higher than those reported under the risk‐time path. In addition, we found evidence for a two‐stage evaluation of risky future prospects: When evaluating a future gamble, individuals first assess the present value of the gamble (time discounting) and then they determine a certainty equivalent (probability discounting). Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.