当局者迷,旁观者清?自我-他人决策的理性差异及其机制

生活充满抉择,由于知识经验的局限,人们常需寻求他人建议,抑或直接请他人代己决策.诸多研究探讨了自我决策、向他人建议,以及代他人决策之间的差异.探究这种差异的动因之一在于考察何种条件下的决策更优或更“理性”.以往研究表明,自我决策或他人决策(向他人建议或代他人决策)均有可能更易违背理性决策原则,隐含着他人决策优于自我决策的“当局者迷,旁观者清”这一传统智慧有一定的边界条件.研究者一般从认知(建构水平理论)、情绪(类型和卷入度),以及动机(调节聚焦理论)三种视角对自我-他人决策差异进行解释.本文作者提出基于理由的决策(reason-based account)假设来解释自我-他人决策在理性程度上的差异.未来研究可从决策过程及脑机制上深入考察自我-他人决策差异及其机制.     

Spill‐over effects of intermittent costs for defection in social dilemmas

This research investigates the role of intermittent monetary costs in restraining individuals from defection in social dilemmas. In Experiment 1, 104 car owners made fictitious choices between a slow and a fast travel mode in the context of a continuous social dilemma. There were four different conditions of monetary costs for choosing the fast mode (defection): no cost, low cost, high cost to self, or high cost to others. Participants defected most when there was no cost and least when they themselves were charged a high cost. A spill‐over effect was obtained such that when others were charged a high cost to defect, defection rates were lower than under no cost. Experiment 2 used 36 undergraduates as participants in an iterated decision task with real groups. The results replicated the major results of Experiment 1. Furthermore, whereas prosocials were strongly affected by intermittent costs for defection (i.e. showed large spill‐over effects), proselfs seemed to be unaffected. Possible explanations of this interaction effect between social value orientation and intermittent punishment for defection are provided. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The role of self‐esteem and anxiety in decision making for self versus others in relationships

Previous research has documented a tendency for people to make more risk‐seeking decisions for others than for themselves in relationship scenarios. Two experiments investigated whether this self–other difference is moderated by participants' self‐esteem and anxiety levels. In Experiment 1, lower self‐esteem and higher anxiety levels were associated with more risk‐averse choices for personal decisions but not for decisions for others. Therefore, participants with lower self‐esteem/higher anxiety showed greater self–other differences in comparison to participants with higher self‐esteem/lower anxiety levels. Experiment 2 demonstrated that this effect was largely mediated by participants' expectations of success and feelings about potential negative outcomes. These results are discussed in the context of “threats to the self,” with a central role played by anxiety and self‐esteem threats in personal decision making but not in decision making for others. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

职业妥协：内涵、影响因素与实施效果

职业妥协是职业决策中的一个重要概念,关系着个体职业发展和社会就业的稳定。为了充分了解职业妥协和有效促进就业。首先,介绍了职业妥协的概念、测量;其次,总结了职业妥协的影响因素,并基于差异理论、目标设定理论、社会认知职业理论和人-环境匹配理论解释了职业妥协的实施效果,汇总了实施效果的边界条件;最后从职业妥协对职业行为的影响、个体职业生涯态度、家庭代际支持和上下级匹配与职业妥协的关系几个方面对未来研究进行了展望。     

Information distortion in self-other decision making

In both organizational and social arenas, individuals make decisions for themselves and for other individuals. But research in decision making has provided little input into whether or how these decisions are psychologically different. In this paper, I propose that decisions—depending on whom they are for—vary according to the extent of information distortion, such that, individuals who choose for themselves demonstrate more postdecisional distortion, yet less predecisional distortion than individuals who choose on behalf of others. To test this hypothesis, participants in an experiment made a decision between two restaurants. Attributes about each restaurant were presented sequentially, and preferences were measured following each attribute. As expected, participants who chose for themselves experienced more postdecisional distortion. However, among participants who chose on behalf of others, greater distortion of predecisional attribute information was observed. These findings shed light on the differences in self-other decision making, as well as on research concerning information distortion.     

Effects of self-other decision making on regulatory focus and choice overload

A growing stream of research is investigating how choices people make for themselves are different from choices people make for others. In this paper, I propose that these choices vary according to regulatory focus, such that people who make choices for themselves are prevention focused, whereas people who make choices for others are promotion focused. Drawing on regulatory focus theory, in particular work on errors of omission and commission, I hypothesize that people who make choices for others experience a reversal of the choice overload effect. In 6 studies, including a field study, I found that people who make choices for themselves are less satisfied after selecting among many options compared to few options, yet, people who make choices for others are more satisfied after selecting among many options compared to few options. Implications and suggestions for other differences in self-other decision making are discussed.     

Eliciting Consumer Choice Heuristics: Sales Representives' Persuasion Strategies

Research has shown that consumers spend little cognitive effort in marketplace decisions (i.e., information acquisition, evaluation of alternatives). In fact, consumers simplify decision making by using decision rules learned from previous purchases. The present research explores the notion that during the course of a sales interaction, sales representatives may use expressions (i.e., primes) that encourage consumers to invoke previously used decision rules. These decision rules lead consumers to consider factors not necessarily relevant to the purchase decision (e.g., what others will think, reciprocate sales representatives' efforts, missed opportunities). Thus, consumers' thoughts are diverted from more pertinent factors such as budget and timing of the purchase. Moreover, consumers persuade themselves to purchase via thoughts concerning the decision rule and visual imagery associated with consumption. The notions of priming and schema- directed thinking are used to explain how sales representatives elicit consumers' decision rules from long-term memory. Implications of these techniques are made with regards to relationship management.     

If I'm not hot, are you hot or not? Physical attractiveness evaluations and dating preferences as a function of one's own attractiveness

Prior research has established that people's own physical attractiveness affects their selection of romantic partners. This article provides further support for this effect and also examines a different, yet related, question: When less attractive people accept less attractive dates, do they persuade themselves that the people they choose to date are more physically attractive than others perceive them to be? Our analysis of data from the popular Web site http://HOTorNOT.com suggests that this is not the case: Less attractive people do not delude themselves into thinking that their dates are more physically attractive than others perceive them to be. Furthermore, the results also show that males, compared with females, are less affected by their own attractiveness when choosing whom to date.     

结果评价中自我体验与替代体验的参照点效应:一项赌博游戏的ERPs研究

本研究采用"投注—反馈"的虚拟赌博游戏范式,通过2个实验分别检测个体在评价自己决策结果 (实验1)和观察他人决策结果 (实验2)过程中赌注大小(即参照点)对大脑活动的影响。结果发现:(1)体验自我决策结果时,输钱比赢钱诱发更负的FRN,仅有一个负反馈(-10元)表现出以赌注为界的分离,且相对效价一样的反馈值诱发的FRN差异不显著;(2)体验他人决策结果时,无论输赢,有赌注比无赌注诱发的FRN更负;而且相对效价相同的反馈值诱发的FRN差异不显著。据此可以认为,FRN一定程度上反映了以赌注为基准的主观标准对社会信息的评价判断:自我体验中的个体对损失的敏感度远高于收益;而替代体验中的个体更倾向于将"损失更多"看作一种负性结果。     

社会压力与决策角色对不同人际敏感性个体助人决策的影响

本研究基于人格的交互作用理论,通过时间与金钱两种助人决策情景,设计两个实验考察了人际敏感性特质对个体助人决策的影响,以及决策角色与社会压力两种情境因素在其中的作用。结果发现：(1)相比低人际敏感性,高人际敏感性个体更容易做出助人决策;(2)相比低社会压力,高社会压力下,高人际敏感性比低人际敏感性个体捐助的金钱更多; (3)高社会压力下,相比低人际敏感性个体,高人际敏感性个体为朋友与陌生人决策时会捐助更多的金钱。研究表明：人际敏感性影响个体的助人决策,决策角色与社会压力会对不同人际敏感性个体的助人决策有不同程度的影响。     

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。     

The Good-in-Bed Effect: College Students’ Tendency to See Themselves as Better Than Others as a Sex Partner

Self-enhancement refers to the finding that people tend to see themselves as better than others. The present research tested whether people display self-enhancement with regard to beliefs about their competency as sexual partners (the good-in-bed effect). Participants were asked to list good and bad sexually related behaviors more frequently performed by the self or by others. Study 1 demonstrated that people selectively associate themselves with good and others with bad sexual behaviors. In Study 2, independent raters judged bad behaviors associated with the self as less negative than bad behaviors associated with others. Study 3 replicated the good-in-bed effect and also found that when the salience of the comparison between good and bad traits is increased, men are more likely than women to demonstrate the effect. Implications of the results for relationship satisfaction are considered.     

The effect of schadenfreude on choice of conventional versus unconventional options

Others’ choices that turn out badly often elicit schadenfreude; that is, feelings of malicious joy about the misfortunes of others. We examine the impact of experiencing schadenfreude when choosing between conventional and unconventional options. Results show that individuals are relatively more likely to choose compromise options and safe options when experiencing schadenfreude, in comparison to happiness and to sadness. In support of an affect-as-information mechanism underlying this effect, the influence of schadenfreude on choice is limited to situations in which decision-makers are unaware of the source of their affect. Our last study demonstrates that individuals interpret schadenfreude as information regarding which option they should choose: its experience heightens anticipation of unfavorable outcomes of their own choices. We end with a discussion of the theoretical and organizational implications of our research.     

决策者角色及相关变量对风险偏好的影响

采用IAT技术测查被试的内隐自尊, 并引入收益和损失两种任务框架, 综合探讨了内隐自尊水平、任务得失框架对自我决策和为他人决策时风险偏好的影响。结果发现：(1)在收益框架下, 被试为他人决策时更冒险, 而在损失框架下, 为自我和他人决策的风险偏好无显著差异; (2)与为自我决策相比, 低内隐自尊者为他人决策时更冒险, 而高内隐自尊者为自我和他人决策的风险偏好无显著差异; (3)内隐自尊水平与任务框架的交互作用及内隐自尊水平、任务框架和决策者角色之间的三级交互作用均不显著。依据相关的理论和发现对这种结果进行了分析和讨论。     

观点采择因素对3～4岁儿童延迟满足决策的影响

通过采用延迟满足决策任务,要求儿童分别为自己和他人做出决策,本研究考察了观点采择因素对儿童情感决策发展的影响。实验一选取3岁和4岁儿童各40名,结果发现3岁儿童和4岁儿童在为自己选和为他人选两种条件下的表现均无显著差异,都倾向于做出延迟选择。实验二选取3岁和4岁儿童各60名,在为他人的选择中进一步区分了不同的观点提示条件,并增加了观点采择测验任务。结果发现,4岁儿童的观点采择能力得到了初步的发展,在不同的观点提示条件下为他人选择时分别表现出了与为自己选择不同的决策趋势;3岁儿童尚未获得观点采择能力,在各种不同观点提示条件下为自己和为他人做选择时差异均不显著。本研究结果表明,观点采择能力对儿童情感决策的影响是发展性的。随着观点采择能力的发展,儿童逐渐能够确立正确的延迟动机,为他人做出有效的决策。     

Indulgence as self‐reward for prior shopping restraint: A justification‐based mechanism

This research investigates the effects of refraining from a purchase temptation at one point in time on choices made at a subsequent opportunity to purchase or consume a tempting product. Four experiments involving scenarios and real decisions demonstrate that the salience of restraint at a prior impulse buying opportunity causes consumers to reward themselves subsequently by choosing indulgence over non-indulgence. We show that indulgence is likely to increase only when prior restraint is salient and hence can be used as a justification. As expected, an index of reasons for vs. against buying mediates the relationship between prior impulse purchase decision and indulgent choice. In further support of the mechanism, we find that prior indulgence can have the same effect as prior restraint, if the prior indulgence is made justifiable. Finally, we show that prior shopping restraint can increase indulgence without a corresponding increase in self-esteem. These findings extend our understanding of self-regulation and demonstrate that everyday consumer decisions such as responses to impulse buying opportunities can have consequential downstream effects.     

News of Y2K and Experiencing Y2K: Exploring the Relationship Between the Third-Person Effect and Optimistic Bias

This study gauged Americans' beliefs about predicted Y2K problems during the weeks before New Year 2000. It examined the alleged relationship between the third-person effect and the social psychological theory of optimistic bias. The third-person effect predicts that people judge themselves less influenced than others by media messages. To explain the effect, some media researchers have drawn on optimistic bias, which posits that people judge themselves less likely than others to experience negative life events. Few researchers, however, have directly tested the empirical relationship between the two perceptual approaches. As hypothesized, respondents judged themselves less influenced than others by news reports about Y2K (third-person perception) and less likely than others to experience Y2K problems (optimistic bias). But the study did not find the hypothesized relationship between the approaches. Furthermore, third-person perception and optimistic bias were functions of mirror opposite blocks of predictors. The findings indicate that third-person perception is not merely a media case study of optimistic bias. We suggested that people use different criteria to estimate experiencing events and believing media messages about the events.     

高中生选科的自我-他人决策差异：预期内疚的作用

本研究首次探讨高中生选科的自我-他人决策差异。结果发现：（1）当科目难度与兴趣存在冲突时,个体倾向于为自己选择低难度低兴趣科目,而为他人选择高难度高兴趣科目;（2）自我-他人决策差异存在程度效应：为近的社会距离他人（朋友）选科时自我-他人决策差异缩小;（3）预期内疚在高中生选科的自我-他人决策差异中起中介作用：相较于为自己选科,为陌生人选择低难度低兴趣科目诱发更高的预期内疚,从而降低其为陌生人选择低难度低兴趣科目的偏好。这些发现拓展了自我-他人决策差异的研究范畴,对家长、学校和教育咨询公司的选科指导具有一定的参考价值。     

Better Safe than Sorry: Risking Irresponsibility by Seeking Uncertainty

Research findings differ as to whether choosing a risky option is an efficient strategy for decision makers seeking to avoid responsibility for potential failures. A risky choice may leave the final outcome to chance factors, but the decision maker can still be held responsible for choosing risk. Further, it is unclear whether a risky choice is a responsible choice. The present article investigates the putative relationship between risk‐taking and responsibility by drawing a distinction between being responsible for the outcome (R1) versus acting responsibly (R2). Four experiments were performed, in which participants were presented with scenarios describing decision makers facing a choice between a risky (uncertain) option and a riskless (certain) option, framed in terms of losses or equivalent gains. The results showed that decision makers who chose the risky alternative were judged to have acted in a less responsible manner (R2), while still being held equally responsible for the outcome (R1), unless they were ignorant of the risks involved. Choosing risk did not absolve decision makers from blame, despite being less causal and less in control than those who chose the riskless option. Risky decision makers were also judged to be more personally involved. The dissociation between R1 and R2 ratings confirms earlier findings and serves to clarify an alleged relationship between risky choices and responsibility aversion. Framing effects for own choices were found in both scenarios. In contrast, responsibility ratings were only slightly affected by frame. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

愿望采择发展水平对幼儿情感决策的影响

选取148名4岁儿童, 运用实验法考察了幼儿的愿望采择发展水平对其情感决策的影响。结果表明: (1) 幼儿的愿望采择水平对其情感决策具有显著影响。情境中他人愿望信息充足时, 幼儿会采择他人愿望并以此为线索为他人决策, 但对线索的利用程度受其愿望采择水平的制约。(2) 在无关于他人愿望信息提示的条件下, 4岁儿童为他人与为自己的情感决策不存在显著差异。(3) 4岁儿童能够采择他人的单一愿望, 但其冲突愿望采择能力还不成熟。