行为决策研究的新取向——基于经验的决策

基于经验的决策是指,在统计概率情境中,个体通过重复选择与反馈获得选项的收益分布信息后进行的决策.基于经验的决策的研究范式主要包括探索-利用范式和探索→利用范式.其暗含的决策人假设是朴素直觉统计学家.其研究关注的主要内容是描述-经验的差异及其原因,以及基于经验的决策内部过程.未来的研究主要从描述-经验差异的原因、描述性决策范式下的结论的重新检验、基于经验的决策的解释模型及其应用研究等方面进行探讨.     

信息呈现方式对医患关系的影响——基于描述和经验决策的差距

在信息加工视角下,信息呈现方式为促进和谐医患关系的形成提供了启示。描述和经验两种信息呈现方式,使随后的决策产生了差距,这是解决医患共同决策问题的关键点。医生在为患者提供医疗建议时,可以选择运用描述或者经验的方式,引导患者选择合适的治疗方案,促成共同决策。医患双方在获取医疗信息时可以同时运用描述和经验的方式,在短时间内让患者获取更多的医疗知识,增加双方之间的合作,避免诊疗偏差,促进和谐医患关系的形成。     

女性择偶决策的线索偏好及信息加工方式

以68名20~33岁之间的未婚女性为被试, 探讨了她们在信息板上做出择偶决策时的线索偏好及信息加工方式。结果显示：(1)候选人的性格、健康状况、责任心是女性择偶时优先考虑的线索; (2)被试在完成信息板任务时间接表现出来的线索偏好不完全等同于主观评估给出的线索偏好; (3)择偶决策是一个有限理性的启发式搜索过程, 且时间紧迫性和候选人数量影响被试对择偶线索的信息加工方式; (4)候选人数量与择偶满意度之间不是简单的线性关系, 增加候选人数量并不一定能够提高决策后的满意度。依据有关的理论和发现对这些结果进行了讨论。     

经验决策：概念、研究和展望

传统风险决策研究范式中, 决策信息是事先限定的, 即在决策之前呈现各个决策选项的概率和收益, 被试基于这些信息进行决策。已有研究表明, 在传统风险决策任务中人们会高估小概率事件(rare event)。然而最近出现的一种基于不完整信息的决策形式, 即经验决策却对这一发现提出了挑战。研究发现, 人们在进行经验决策时会表现出对小概率事件的低估, 经验决策和传统决策形式之间存在差异。本文主要介绍经验决策的概念及其研究, 并从学习和不确定程度等角度对两种决策形式进行再认识, 以进一步理解经验决策并提出展望。     

描述信息与经验不一致对个体风险选择的影响：决策模型的拟合

采用描述−经验冲突范式,考察损益情境下,描述信息与经验不一致对个体风险选择的影响,通过模型拟合探究其内在机制。研究1a和研究1b采用单因素被试间设计,自变量为描述信息与经验不一致程度,因变量为风险选项选择率。结果发现,获益情境中,描述信息与经验不一致程度的主效应不显著;而损失情境中,风险选项选择率受到显著影响。研究2比较决策模型参数发现,获益情境中,描述信息权重参数ξ和选择一致性参数c显著小于损失情境,而近因参数φ显著大于损失情境。这表明,当描述信息与经验不一致时,相对于获益情境,损失情境下个体更大程度地采用描述信息进行决策。研究揭示了损益情境中描述信息与经验不一致影响个体风险选择的机制。     

儿童攻击行为的短期追踪干预研究:从社会信息加工的角度

以社会信息加工模型(Social Information-Processing Model,简称SIP)为理论依据设计社会认知干预方案,将被试(包括132名攻击性儿童)分为实验组、安慰剂(阅读)组和控制组进行短期追踪干预研究,在此基础上考察该干预方案对减少儿童的攻击行为以及提高社会信息加工能力的作用。研究结果表明:(1)该干预方案对提高攻击性儿童的社会信息加工能力有明显的即时效果和持续效果,具体表现为该方案有效地减少了攻击性儿童的敌意归因偏见和攻击行为的产生,有助于攻击性儿童建立关系目标并正确认知攻击行为的后果;(2)班主任评定三组儿童的攻击行为显著减少,评定结果可能受到期望效应的影响。     

基于三参照点理论的薪酬差距与离职决策的分析

离职是组织管理研究中一个重要的课题, 但鲜有研究将其纳入风险决策的框架中。本文运用行为决策的研究方法, 将离职作为一种风险选择, 运用三参照点理论探讨个体薪酬差距与离职决策之间的关系。我们的理论分析和初步的预研究发现：(1)个体薪酬现状与底线的差距负向预测离职决策, 薪酬目标与现状的差距正向预测离职决策; (2)进一步推导出薪酬差距与离职决策间存在双拐点的非线性函数关系; (3)同行现状收入作为横向参照系, 在薪酬差距与离职决策两者之间起锚定作用; (4)组织中薪酬分布的差距大小作为纵向参照系, 在薪酬差距与离职决策两者之间起调节作用。本研究将离职作为一种风险决策进行研究, 不仅对于离职理论与决策理论的发展有一定意义, 而且为人力资源管理实践提供了指导与启示。     

复杂情境下不同角度及思维方式的决策表现差异:决策视角-心理距离的作用

本研究运用2个行为实验探讨了复杂情境下自我决策、为他人决策和预期他人决策在无意识思维方式和有意识思维方式下的决策表现差异。实验1发现复杂情境中无意识思维方式下,自我决策和为他人决策的决策表现显著优于预期他人决策,自我决策和为他人决策表现没有显著差异。实验2发现复杂情境中有意识思维时,在陌生人条件下,为他人决策表现分数显著高于自我决策与预期他人决策,自我决策和预期他人决策表现无显著差异;在朋友条件下,为他人决策和预期他人决策的决策表现显著优于自我决策,为他人决策和预期他人决策表现无显著差异。研究结果支持了本文提出的决策视角-心理距离作用假设(the Perspective-Distance Effect Hypothesis,PDEH)。     

人类颞叶皮层与视、听信息加工:Ⅱ.左颞叶癫痫病人的脑事件相关电位

记录7名左颞叶癫痫病人和9名正常人在四种实验条件下的事件相关电位：（1）听觉脑子诱发电位,（2）红色闪光刺激,（3）陌生人嗓音识别,（4）陌生人面孔识别。实验结果发现,两组被试在视觉信息加工中无差异,在嗓音识别中病人的N150和P300波潜伏期大于正常人,表明其复杂听觉认知功能受到影响．红色闪光刺激和噪音识别条件下,病人的P100波幅大于正常人,说明病人对强刺激的物理强度有较高的反应水平,不易习惯化。     

情境启动和认知需要对决策中信息加工的影响

以100名大学生为被试,采用信息板技术,以职业选择作为决策任务,考察由情境启动激活的决策策略和认知需要的个体差异对决策中信息加工的影响.结果表明,通过启动激活的决策策略和认知需要对决策过程都有显著的影响,在加工时间上和点击次数上两者交互作用分别达到了(边缘)显著水平.说明人们在决策中的信息加工是受情境因素和个体差异因素共同影响的.     

Group information elaboration and group decision making: The role of shared task representations

Decision making groups often exchange and integrate distributed information to a lesser extent than is desirable for high-quality decisions. We propose that group members’ shared task representations play an important role in this respect, because groups are often insufficiently attuned to the task’s information elaboration requirements. Task representations emphasizing elaboration of decision-relevant information should therefore enhance decision-making performance. This should hold especially when group members realize that they share these task representations, because this realization removes psychological barriers to introducing new insights. Testing these hypotheses, we compared information elaboration and decision-making performance of control groups and groups receiving instructions emphasizing information elaboration in two experiments. Half of the experimental groups were also made to realize that they shared the elaboration instructions. As predicted, groups with task representations emphasizing information elaboration and the realization they shared these representations outperformed groups in the other conditions. This effect was mediated by information elaboration.     

Processes of patient decision making: Theoretical and methodological issues

Abstract

There is a paucity of research studying patients' decision making processes. Traditional normative approaches investigating human decision have presented rational, analytic processing as a ‘gold standard’ for decision making with decision aids developed to facilitate such thinking. This paradigm has been challenged by the recent emergence of naturalistic decision making. Naturalistic approaches argue for techniques modelled closer to how decisions are actually made in ‘real life’. Early work in this evolving field suggests the importance of more automatic, intuitive processing such as the use of heuristic short-cuts. This paper discusses the contribution of naturalistic decision theory and assesses its usefulness as an alternative to classical decision approaches in investigating patient decision making. Approaches for measuring underlying cognitive processes are also critically discussed.     

The use of partial information on weights in multicriteria decision problems

This paper addresses multicriteria decision problems in which only partial information is given in the decision-making process. We generalize existing results about preference relations induced by nonnegative inverse matrices, allowing linear relations on weights with upper and lower bounds. In addition we develop conditions for additional information that preserve the special properties studied and show how to incorporate the new information to the model. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Group vs individual information processing: The effects of outcome feedback on decision making

Recent theories of individual decision making have emphasized the role of environmental feedback on decision performance and confidence. However, in relation to group decision making, feedback has received only minor attention. This study compared individual and group decision performance and confidence on a multicue personnel decision task under three different feedback conditions. Individuals and five-person groups decided whether to promote 48 different job candidates, and rated how confident they were in each of their decisions. Feedback as to the correctness of their decisions was provided after (a) every decision (Total Feedback), (b) only those decisions to promote the candidate (Partial Feedback), or (c) after none of the decisions (No Feedback). Results indicated that groups performed best under total feedback, while individuals performed best under partial feedback. In addition, greater amounts of feedback reduced individuals' confidence but had little effect on group member confidence. Implications for both current theory in decision making and group vs individual information processing are discussed.     

Cognitive ecology: the evolutionary ecology of information processing and decision making

edited by Reuven Dukas, University of Chicago Press, 1998. $95.00/￡75.95 hbk, $30.00/￡23.95 pbk (x+420 pages) ISBN 0 226 16932 4 (hbk), 0 226 16933 2 (pbk).     

Motivated information processing and group decision-making: Effects of process accountability on information processing and decision quality

Integrating dual-process models [Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. NewYork: Guilford Press] with work on information sharing and group decision-making [Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467-1478.], we predicted that groups with high epistemic motivation engage in more information-driven and less preference-driven interaction, and achieve better decisions. An experiment manipulating process accountability showed that groups under process accountability experienced greater need for more information, repeated unshared information more often, and more often chose the correct decision alternative. Mediation analysis established that epistemic motivation produced high quality decisions because it stimulated systematic information processing. Results also revealed that preference heterogeneity stimulated information-driven interaction and led to higher decision quality.     

Focus induced tunnel vision in managerial judgment and decision making: The peril and the antidote

Managers often must assess singular strategic options. Four studies of such assessments demonstrate a tunnel vision effect: Focal managerial options often are favored in an evidentially unjustifiable manner. Study 1 concerns new product development, and demonstrates that a prototype that has become focal tends to be judged overly favorably, and is chosen for launch with unwarranted enthusiasm. Study 2 shows that this tunnel vision effect generalizes to judgments and decisions about general strategy. Study 3 focuses on the information search patterns underlying the effect, and Study 4 replicates the tunnel vision effect among experienced executives, and demonstrates the utility of a debiasing procedure. Data in all of the studies implicate selective processing as the driver of the tunnel vision effect, and further understanding of how selective processing affects choice. Several alternative operationalizations of the empirically tested debiasing procedure are discussed.     

Altering information to gain action control: Functional aspects of human information processing in decision making

In recent approaches to social judgment, information distortion has been discussed primarily as a violation of individual rationality, due to unintentionally occurring biases. In contrast to this view, it is argued that frequently individuals make purposive use of selective changes in information processing in order to avoid indecisiveness. In this sense, selective changes in information processing may be considered a functional requirement of a volitional process which protects the current intention (or tentative decision) from being replaced by competing behavioral tendencies. On the basis of J. Kuhl's theory of action control (1981, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 155–170; 1982, in W. Hacker, W. Volpert, & M. von Cranach, Eds., Cognitive and Motivational Aspects of Action, Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1984, in B. A. Maher, Progress in Experimental Personality Research, Vol. 13, New York: Academic Press) it was predicted that subjects having a high score on the action-control scale (i.e., action-oriented subjects) should show a stronger tendency to increase the attractiveness rating of a tentatively preferred decision during the process of decision making than subjects scoring low on that scale (i.e., state-oriented subjects). To test this assumption, students searching for an apartment were offered 16 apartments along with a list containing information about the alternatives. The subjects had to rate the attractiveness of each apartment twice before they were asked to indicate which apartments they would like to rent. The results confirmed the predictions. It was found that action-oriented subjects increased the divergence of their attractiveness ratings from the first to the second point of evaluation, whereas state-oriented subjects did not.     

An information processing view of framing effects: The role of causal schemas in decision making

People prefer a sure gain to a probable larger gain when the two choices are presented from a gain perspective, but a probable larger loss to a sure loss when the objectively identical choices are presented from a loss perspective. Such reversals of preference due to the context of the problem are known asframing effects. In the present study, schema activation and subjects’ interpretations of the problems were examined as sources of the framing effects. Results showed that such effects could be eliminated by introducing into a problem a causal schema that provided a rationale for the reciprocal relationship between the gains and the losses. Moreover, when subjects were freed from framing they were consistently risk seeking in decisions about human life, but risk averse in decisions about property. Irrationality in choice behaviors and the ecological implication of framing effects are discussed.