最后通牒博弈中提议者情绪预测偏差对公平决策的影响:公平感知的作用

为探讨提议者情绪预测偏差对公平决策的影响以及其中介机制,采用了两轮最后通牒博弈提议者实验任务,第一轮测量分配方案被接受和拒绝的情绪预测偏差,第二轮测量提议者的分配方案。研究结果表明:(1)提议者情绪预测偏差影响公平决策;(2)公平感知在提议者情绪预测偏差与公平决策间起部分中介作用。研究认为,提议者对积极结果的情绪预测偏差,会降低其公平感知,进而降低其分配方案公平性; 提议者对消极结果的情绪预测偏差,会提高其公平感知,进而增加其分配方案公平性。     

情绪和任务框架对自我和预期他人决策时风险偏好的影响

两个实验考察了情绪和任务框架对自我和预期他人决策时风险偏好的影响。结果表明:(1)获益框架下,悲伤情绪比愉悦情绪诱发更强的风险偏好,自我决策比预期他人决策表现出更强的风险偏好;(2)损失框架下,愉悦情绪比悲伤情绪诱发更强的风险偏好,预期他人决策比自我决策表现出更强的风险偏好;(3)在自我决策时,愉悦情绪在损失框架下比在获益框架下诱发了更强的风险偏好,悲伤情绪在获益框架下比在损失框架下诱发了更强的风险偏好;在预期他人决策时,无论是愉悦情绪还是悲伤情绪,损失框架均比获益框架诱发了更强的风险偏好。     

孤独症谱系障碍者的情绪韵律识别

情绪韵律识别是从声学线索变化中提取情绪信息,进而推断他人情绪状态的过程。情绪韵律识别缺陷是孤独症谱系障碍者的一种常见表现,此缺陷会受到情绪韵律强度、字面语义、情景语境、心理声学能力和共患疾病的影响。目前,该人群情绪韵律识别缺陷的原因探析集中于心智化能力不足、社会动机缺失和经验匮乏假说等。孤独症谱系障碍者情绪韵律识别的神经机制研究主要集中于与健康人群的比较,相关发现包括情绪韵律识别的右半球优势效应、局部脑区激活增多、大脑网络连接不足和早期注意模式异常。未来,应该进一步提高实验范式的生态效度,注重孤独症个体差异因素,整合相关理论解释,并开发有效的测评工具和干预策略。     

价值取向对自我他人决策时公平规范执行的影响

社会价值取向反映了人们对自己和他人分配结果的一种稳定偏好,影响着个体对提议公平性的认知及规范执行。同时,自我-他人决策差异也是影响规范执行的重要因素,但目前尚不清楚价值取向和社会距离如何影响公平规范执行。本研究选取了20名合作者和20名个人主义者,使用单次匿名最后通牒博弈任务,考察了资产分配情景中价值取向对自我-他人决策时公平规范执行的影响。结果表明：（1）相比自我决策条件,合作者在替他人决策时更多的接受不公平提议,而公平提议的接受率不受社会距离的调节;个人主义者的提议接受率则不受社会距离和提议类型的交互影响;（2）合作者替他人决策时的接受阈限显著高于自我决策,而个人主义者在自我决策和替他人决策时的接受阈限无显著差异。这些结果表明价值取向能够调节自我-他人决策时,人们对不公平提议的规范执行。     

情绪背景和社会预期对社会经济决策行为的影响

采用最后通牒博弈范式,探讨不同情绪背景对社会经济决策中社会预期效应的影响。以90名大学生为被试,利用不同效价的电影片段(正性、负性和中性)诱发相应的目标情绪。通过操作社会规范性信息启动被试对分配方案公平性的不同预期。结果发现:在负性和中性情绪背景下,高预期组更倾向于拒绝接受不公平分配。在正性情绪背景下,高预期组和低预期组面对不公平提议时的接受率没有显著差异。结果表明正性情绪背景使社会预期效应发生改变,回应者对分配方案的高预期不再对决策结果产生显著影响。     

研究心理理论的新方法——失言识别任务

心理理论是对他人心理状态进行推论的能力。考察心理理论的经典范式是错误信念任务, 而青少年和成人在这种任务上可能出现天花板效应。为了测量青少年和成人的心理理论, Valerie E. Stone和她的合作者设计了失言识别任务。征求了Stone意见, 对失言识别任务的提出、构成、使用进行了介绍, 说明了该任务相对于经典范式的优势; 与此同时, 分析了失言识别任务范式存在的一些问题, 比如其效度指标问题, 与言语能力的分离问题, 失言识别任务与执行功能之间的分离等。未来研究可以尝试编制失言识别任务的本土化的量表, 并利用其探讨年长个体心理理论水平发展变化的规律。     

决策中情绪作用机制的理论研究述评

决策研究领域日益重视情绪的作用,情绪的认知评估理论、道德情绪理论及动机维度模型等新兴情绪观使研究者对决策机制的认识不断深化,出现了解释情绪在各类决策中作用机制的理论成果：情绪浸润模型、风险决策感知与评估双系统模型、情绪即社会信息模型、神经情感决策理论。未来尚需加强作用机制的验证研究,从情绪具身角度进行思考,基于知情交互的角度整合理论体系,重视神经生理机制理论及模型建构。并简要分析了理论成果的启示。     

情绪对个体判断和决策影响研究概述

情绪对个体判断和决策影响已经成为目前的一个研究热点。情感启发式、决策情感理沦等为研究情绪对个体判断和决策的影响提供了一定的理论基础．而近期提出的“风险作为情感”假设为研究提供了较为全面的理沦框架。此外,个体差异比较、时间压力以及信息激起为研究情绪在个体判断和决策中的作用提供了很好的研究思路。     

从心理理论与执行功能的关系看孤独症

孤独症是一种病因未明的广泛性发展障碍,它的诊断主要基于患者的行为表现。针对这些行为特点,研究者们提出了心理理论缺失说和执行功能障碍说。但是,有研究表明孤独症患者并不是在所有的心理理论任务和执行功能任务上都存在障碍。所以,单纯地采用心理理论缺失说或执行功能障碍说都不能完整解释孤独症症状。一般来说,心理理论缺失的孤独症个体,同时也伴有执行功能障碍。近年来,大量的研究结果发现,心理理论与执行功能确实存在紧密联系。然而,目前对它们关系的考察主要集中在学龄前儿童的错误信念理解和抑制控制上。心理理论与执行功能都分别包含许多成分,它们彼此的关系可能会在不同年龄段发生变化。因此,研究者需要进一步探查不同年龄段,不同心理理论任务与执行功能不同成分与范式之间的关系,并将这种关系应用于临床实践,帮助诊断和培训孤独症个体。     

儿童的分配公平性:心理理论的作用

心理理论是影响儿童分配公平性的重要因素之一。\"多重动机\"的理论假设认为心理理论能够帮助儿童在不同的动机中权衡利弊,找到满足自我利益和他人需求之间的平衡;其中,感知需求、推断意图、理解情绪是影响独裁者博弈、最后通牒博弈、第三方惩罚中分配公平性的主要成分。未来研究需为此提供更多实证依据,探讨不同类型的公平分配与心理理论各组成成分的关系,以及可否通过训练心理理论能力促进儿童公平概念的发展。     

身体姿势启动的内隐权力感对公平决策的影响

已有研究表明,扩张身体姿势可启动个体的权力感。基于具身认知的视角,实验1考察身体姿势对免惩罚游戏的提议者进行金钱分配时的影响,实验2和实验3分别考察最后通牒游戏、免惩罚游戏的回应者在蜷缩和扩张姿势下对各种分配类型方案的拒绝率。结果表明,与蜷缩姿势相比,扩张姿势使个体更倾向于在免惩罚游戏提议者角色时做出更多的利己不公平分配,同时使个体更倾向于拒绝最后通牒游戏和免惩罚游戏中的不公平分配。本研究证明了扩张姿势启动的权力感可影响个体的公平决策。     

不同博弈情境下社会排斥对社会决策的影响作用

本研究借助经典的最后通牒博弈范式(UG)和独裁者博弈范式(DG),将回应者/接受者作为研究对象,考察了不同公平条件、平等条件下社会排斥对社会决策的影响作用。实验结果发现:(1)在面对高不公平性的分配方案时,被排斥组比被接纳组更倾向于拒绝接受该分配方案;(2)被排斥组对高不公平性分配方案的满意度要显著低于被接纳组;(3)被排斥组在不平等的博弈(DG)条件下对分配方案的满意度显著低于平等博弈(UG)条件下对分配方案的满意度。本研究结果说明,社会排斥情境下的被试对公平与平等因素更加敏感:在高不公平条件下,被排斥的个体表现出更少的合作互惠行为,甚至不惜放弃自身经济利益,也要惩罚博弈对方的不公平行为;此外,在不平等的博弈条件下,被排斥的个体产生了更多的消极情绪体验。本文的研究结果提高了社会决策研究的生态效度和传统决策模型的预测效度,有利于更加完整透彻地了解社会决策的影响因素。     

Social Emotions and Intertemporal Choice: "Hot" Mechanisms for Building Social and Economic Capital

ABSTRACT— Individuals regularly confront situations in which acceptance of short-term costs may lead to long-term gains. Given that individuals frequently discount the utility of future benefits with respect to more immediate ones, successfully solving such intertemporal choice dilemmas has been theorized to involve self-regulation aimed at controlling emotional responses that are sensitive to immediate rewards. In this article, I argue for a more multifaceted view of the role played by emotions in intertemporal choice. In support of this view, I review emerging evidence demonstrating the ability of specific, socially oriented emotions to facilitate behaviors designed to build social and economic capital in the long run.     

Who will win Wimbledon? The recognition heuristic in predicting sports events

Goldstein and Gigerenzer ( 2002 ) described the recognition heuristic as a fast, frugal, and effective decision strategy. However, most studies concerning the recognition heuristic have been conducted in static domains, that is, in domains where it could plausibly be argued that relevant variables stay relatively constant. Yet the question is whether the heuristic would also work in dynamic environments where the quality of the actors rises and falls, such as in sports. We tested performance of the recognition heuristic in a dynamic environment and used it to predict the outcomes of tennis matches in Wimbledon 2003. Recognition data of amateur tennis players and laypeople was used to build recognition rankings. These rankings correlated with official rankings and led to at least as good predictions. Simulations of individual choices showed high recognition validities of both amateurs (0.73) and laypeople (0.67). In a second study the recognition heuristic correctly predicted 90% of actual individual choices. Overall, the recognition heuristic may be effectively generalized to dynamic environments. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Regret in Decision Making

Decision research has only recently started to take seriously the role of emotions in choices and decisions. Regret is the emotion that has received the most attention. In this article, we sample a number of the initial regret studies from psychology and economics, and trace some of the complexities and contradictions to which they led. We then sketch a new theory, decision justification theory (DJT), which synthesizes several apparently conflicting findings. DJT postulates two core components of decision–related regret, one associated with the (comparative) evaluation of the outcome, the other with the feeling of self–blame for having made a poor choice. We reinterpret several existing studies in DJT terms. We then report some new studies that directly tested (and support) DJT, and propose a number of research issues that follow from this new approach to regret.     

负性情绪抑制对社会决策行为的影响

利用心理生理实验法, 通过将情绪抑制操作引入最后通牒博弈实验范式, 探讨负性情绪抑制的主观情绪体验、生理反应及其对社会决策行为的影响。以40名大学生为被试, 采用MP150型16导生理记录仪记录皮肤电反应和心率。实验为2 (组别：情绪抑制组、自然观看组) × 2 (性别：男、女) × 2 (博弈对手：人、计算机) × 4 (分配方案：￥5：￥5、￥7：￥3、￥8：￥2、￥9：￥1)的混合设计, 其中组别和性别为被试间因素, 博弈对手和分配方案为被试内因素。结果发现：(1)对负性情绪进行抑制没有减少被试相应的主观体验, 情绪抑制使皮肤电反应性增强; (2)负性情绪抑制的主观体验和生理反应不存在性别差异; (3)在面对不公平的分配方案时, 情绪抑制组被试比自然观看组更倾向于拒绝接受。结果表明在最后通牒博弈中,情绪抑制影响回应者的行为反应,使他们更倾向于做出不理智的决策。     

What a Feeling: The Role of Immediate and Anticipated Emotions in Risky Decisions

The risk‐as‐feelings hypothesis argues that many risky decisions are not only predicted by anticipated emotions, as most consequentialistic decision making theories would presume, but also by immediate emotions. Immediate emotions refer to the “hot” visceral feelings people feel as they contemplate a specific decision option at the cusp of making a decision, whereas anticipated emotions are those emotions that people forecast that they will feel once they experience possible consequences of that decision. Four studies focused on the role of both types of emotions in decisions under risk and uncertainty. Decisions were substantively predicted by immediate emotional states beyond anticipated emotions or the subjective probability attached to outcomes. Thus, risky choices may be prompted, in part, by how people feel about the “riskless” portion of the decision—specifically, the various decision options they are contemplating—rather than the potential outcomes those options may produce. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

An attribution-emotion-action interpretation of the “evil eye” in everyday conflict situations

An attribution-emotion-action model was used to examine individuals’ willingness to seek for another person's face in conflict situations. To induce interpersonal conflict and frustration, participants were engaged in the ultimatum bargaining game (UBG) where they received predetermined offers. A simple UBG consists of two players, a Proposer and a Responder, who must decide how to divide a resource. Our findings confirm our predictions in that during the interpersonal conflict (i.e., betraying the norm of equality in the UBG), participants made more controllable based attributions, felt more frustrated (less sympathetic), and more likely requested to view the Proposer's photograph than when there is no conflict. Stated differently, in conflict situations, the likelihood of seeking another person's face increases when controllable attributions are made and when frustration is felt.