权力、任务框架对自我和为他人决策时风险偏好的影响

采用情境回忆任务启动被试的权力,并引入收益和损失两种任务框架,综合考察权力高低、任务框架对自我决策和为他人决策时风险偏好的影响。结果表明:(1)在为他人决策中,启动高权力被试有更强的风险偏好,而自我决策中,高、低权力启动组被试风险偏好上无显著差异;(2)在为他人决策中,被试在收益框架和损失框架下的风险偏好差异不显著,而在自我决策中,损失框架下的风险偏好显著高于收益框架;(3)低权力启动的被试,在损失框架下,为他人决策的风险偏好要小于自我决策,而在收益框架下差异不显著;高权力启动的被试无论在收益框架还是损失框架,自我-他人风险决策都不存在显著差异。     

睾酮对价值加工的影响——基于“累积前景”理论框架的决策行为研究

较多研究支持睾酮和决策中的风险寻求行为呈正相关,但是也有其他的研究未能发现这种关系。基于决策的累计前景理论,本研究使用动态估计参数估计任务(DEEP),结合计算模型的方法,对120名双盲给药、有安慰剂对照的被试进行睾酮对价值加工过程作用的探究。结果显示,睾酮减少了个体的概率扭曲以及增加了损失规避,但是没有引发明显的风险寻求行为,研究结果表明睾酮对个体的价值加工过程产生了影响,使个体对概率的感知更接近于客观值并且增加了对损失的敏感性。     

成就目标启动对风险偏好的调节作用

新近研究发现,目标可以在无意识的条件下被激活并自动地引导行为以达成目标,但其内部机制尚不清楚。本研究试图考察风险偏好是否受无意识目标调节。实验采用问卷作为启动刺激,分别启动被试追求成功的目标与避免失败的目标,并在收益框架下和损失框架下测量被试的风险偏好。结果发现：在收益框架下,受到追求成功目标启动的被试比受到避免失败目标启动的被试更加偏好风险;而在损失框架下,两组被试间未发现显著差异。上述结果表明自动激活的成就目标可以影响个体的风险偏好,使个体面对风险情境时能做出更合适的行为以达成目标,即对风险偏好的调节是无意识目标自动影响行为的途径之一。     

社会价值取向对自我社会奖赏加工的影响——来自ERPs的证据

社会价值取向(Social Value Orientation, SVO)是相互依存情境下人们对自己和他人分配结果的一种稳定的社会偏好, 按SVO不同可以将个体分为“亲社会取向”和“亲自我取向”个体。已有研究表明SVO影响个体对涉及自我金钱奖赏的结果评价加工, 而它如何影响自我社会奖赏加工过程尚不明确。本研究让亲社会取向和亲自我取向被试完成涉及自我社会奖赏(包含社会接纳和自我成就感)的猜牌建议给予任务, 同时记录其加工他人对建议的反馈(接受vs.拒绝)和他人最终结果(收益vs.损失)时诱发的脑电成分。结果发现, 在建议反馈加工阶段, 相比亲自我取向个体, 亲社会取向个体在反馈相关负波(FRN)波幅(峰-峰值)和P3平均波幅上, 建议被对方接受和被对方拒绝所诱发的波幅差异均显著; 在他人最终结果加工阶段, 建议被对方拒绝后, 对于亲社会取向个体, 对方损失诱发的反馈相关负FRN波幅比对方收益诱发的波幅更负, 而对方损失诱发的P3波幅小于对方收益诱发的波幅; 对于亲自我取向个体, 对方损失与收益诱发的FRN波幅无差异, 对方损失诱发的P3波幅显著大于对方收益诱发的波幅。这些结果表明社会价值取向调节个体对自我社会奖赏的加工。     

得失情境下的图形框架对跨期选择倾向的影响

为分离言语表述的干扰,实验采用简单选择任务,通过2(图形框架)×2(跨期选择)×2(得失情境)被试内实验设计探讨得失情境下图形框架对个体跨期选择的影响。结果发现:(1)在突出时间条件下,被试更倾向于选择小而即时的选项,而在突出金额条件下,被试选择小而即时和大而延时的概率没有差异;(2)收益情境中,个体更多地选择大而延时的选项,而在损失情境中,个体选择即时损失的概率更高。结果表明,跨期选择中个体的决策偏好会随着得失情境及决策选项描述方式的变化而变化。     

权力感对道德困境判断的影响：基于CNI模型的分析

采用道德困境判断的CNI（consequence, norm, inaction）模型,通过两个实验考察权力感对道德困境判断的影响。实验1探讨个人权力感对道德困境判断的影响,结果显示高个人权力感显著增加被试对规则的敏感,促使个体做出道义论的道德判断。实验2考察回忆任务启动的权力感对道德困境判断的影响,发现相对于低权力感启动的被试,高权力感启动的被试在进行判断时更关注行为的结果,对规则更不敏感,这说明启动的权力感促进功利主义的道德判断,抑制道义论的道德判断。结果表明,不同类型的权力感对道德困境判断的影响存在差异。     

劝捐策略和框架效应对个体捐赠决策的影响

采用两个3×2完全随机实验设计,考察劝捐策略和目标框架效应对个体捐赠决策的影响,结果表明：（1）劝捐策略和目标框架效应的主效应显著,信用劝捐被试捐赠更多,决策时间更短,损失目标框架比收益目标框架的被试决策时间更短,捐赠更多,被试在信用X损失框架情境中捐赠最多,反应时最短;（2）劝捐策略和框架效应的交互效应均显著,情感策略受框架效应影响较大,在损失框架下被试反应时更短,捐赠更多。     

损失-收益框架下责任感对建议采纳的影响

实验1和实验2分别探讨了在损失-收益框架下特质责任感和状态责任感对建议采纳的影响。结果发现：（1）无论是特质责任感还是状态责任感,高责任感的个体比低责任感个体更倾向于采纳他人建议。（2）收益框架下的个体比损失框架下的个体更愿意采纳他人建议。（3）无论是特质责任感还是状态责任感,高责任感的个体对他人建议的采纳程度不受框架的影响,而低责任感个体在收益框架下比在损失框架下的建议采纳程度高。     

情绪和认知方式对个体建议采纳的影响*

通过电影诱发被试的情绪,利用两个实验探讨了情绪和认知方式对个体建议采纳的影响。实验一采用选择任务,实验二采用估计任务,研究发现:(1)愉快情绪状态下的被试建议采纳程度高于愤怒的被试,场依存型被试建议采纳程度高于场独立型被试,女性比起男性更易采纳他人建议;(2)在估计任务中,无论场依存者还是场独立者,在愤怒状态下建议采纳程度无显著差异,且均低于愉快状态下。     

权力感和任务难度对个体建议采纳的影响

从人际关系的视角,通过两个实验探讨权力感和任务难度对个体建议采纳的影响。实验一启动被试的合理权力感,实验二启动被试的不合理权力感。研究发现：(1)当权力合理时,权力感水平对建议采纳有显著影响,高权力感水平决策者的建议采纳程度显著低于低权力感水平的决策者;任务难度对建议采纳有显著影响,决策者在困难任务中的建议采纳程度显著高于简单任务中。(2)当权力不合理时,在简单任务中,高权力感水平决策者的建议采纳程度显著低于低权力感水平的决策者;而在困难任务中,两者的建议采纳程度没有显著性差异。     

Power and loss aversion

Four experiments tested the prediction that power reduces loss aversion by increasing the anticipated value of gains and shrinking the negative anticipated value of losses. Experiment 1 provided initial support for the prediction that those in power are less loss averse by replicating a classic paradigm of loss aversion in riskless choice and demonstrating moderation by power. Experiments 2 and 3 expanded on this finding by breaking apart the components of loss aversion to determine how power may reduce it: via gains, losses, or both. Across two scenarios and two different measures of anticipated value, power reduced the anticipated threat associated with a loss. However, the prediction that power increases the anticipated value of gains was not supported. Finally, Experiment 4 replicated the results of Experiments 2 and 3 in the context of a choice with real consequences for the participants. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

概率大小、损益结果和认知闭合需要对模糊规避的影响

模糊规避是指在相同奖赏的情况下,决策者会力图规避从主观上判断具有模糊概率的事件而偏好具有相同精确概率的事件。本研究探讨了概率大小、损益结果和认知闭合需要对模糊规避的影响。研究发现,在小概率受益的情况下,个体倾向于模糊寻求;在中概率受益的情况下,个体倾向于模糊规避;在高概率受益的情况下,个体倾向于模糊规避;在小概率损失的情况下,个体倾向于模糊规避;在中概率损失的情况下,个体倾向于模糊规避;在高概率损失的情况下,个体倾向于模糊寻求。但是,研究并未发现认知闭合需要对模糊规避有预测作用。     

Moderating Loss Aversion: Loss Aversion Has Moderators,But Reports of its Death are Greatly Exaggerated

Loss aversion, the principle that losses impact decision making more than equivalent gains, is a fundamental idea in consumer behavior and decision making, though its existence has recently been called into question. Across five unique samples (N_total = 17,720), we tested several moderators of loss aversion, which supported a preference construction account. Across studies, more domain knowledge and experience were associated with lower loss aversion, though people of all knowledge and experience levels were loss averse. Among car buyers, those who knew more about a particular car attribute (e.g., fuel economy) were less loss averse for that attribute but not other attributes (e.g., comfort), consistent with the idea that people with less attribute knowledge are more likely to construct preferences, thereby increasing loss aversion. Additionally, older consumers were more loss averse across different loss aversion measures and studies. We discuss implications for several accounts of loss aversion, including accounts rooted in status quo bias, emotion, or ownership. In addition to discovering loss aversion moderators, we cast doubt on recent claims that loss aversion is a fallacy or is fully explained by status quo bias, risk aversion, or the educated laboratory samples often used to study loss aversion.     

Changing plans: Dynamic inconsistency and the effect of experience on the reference point

This article presents a new test of a principle of decision making calleddynamic consistency. This principle was tested in an experiment in which participants were asked to make decisions about a second gamble within a sequence of two gambles. Participants were first asked to make a planned choice about the second gamble. The planned choice was madebefore the first gamble was played and was conditioned on the anticipated outcomes of the first gamble.After the first gamble was played, the same participants were asked to make a final choice about the second gamble, conditioned on the experienced outcome of the first gamble. The results showed that participants’ final choices were frequently inconsistent with their plans, even when the anticipated and experienced outcomes were identical. These inconsistencies occurred in a systematic direction. Experiencing an anticipated gain resulted with a change toward risk aversion, and experiencing an anticipated loss resulted in a change toward risk seeking. These results are explained in terms of the effect of actual experience on the reference point used for the evaluation of the decision problem.     

Self‐other decision‐making differences in loss aversion: A regulatory focus perspective

Drawing on a cultural perspective, we examined whether differences in self‐other decision making documented in the West can be replicated in an Eastern context. Study 1 revealed that Chinese participants showed self‐other decision‐making differences in loss aversion similar to those observed in Western participants; loss aversion differed depending on the type of decision recipient, and trait regulatory focus moderated the self‐other decision‐making difference. Study 2 found a mediating effect of situational prevention but not promotion focus on the relationship between decision makers’ roles and loss aversion. Furthermore, both studies revealed that participants did not show a preference for loss aversion, suggesting that the baseline of self‐other decision‐making differences has shifted in China compared to the West.     

不确定性容忍度对模糊决策中决策偏好的影响及其情景依赖性*

研究以Ellsberg选瓶任务为决策材料,探讨了不同任务特征下个体不确定性容忍度对模糊决策中决策偏好的影响。结果发现,获益情景下:高概率时高、低容忍度个体对模糊选项的选择无显著差异,均偏好模糊规避;中概率时低容忍度个体比高容忍度个体表现出更低程度的模糊规避,前者倾向于模糊中立,后者倾向于模糊规避;低概率时两者对模糊选项的选择无显著差异,均倾向于模糊中立。损失情景下:高概率时两者对模糊选项的选择无显著差异,均倾向于模糊寻求;中概率时低容忍度比高容忍度个体更偏好模糊寻求,前者倾向于模糊寻求,后者倾向于模糊中立;低概率时两者对模糊选项的选择无显著差异,均倾向于模糊规避。这表明,不确定性容忍度对模糊决策偏好产生作用,但这种作用会受到损益概率和损益结果的影响,具有情景依赖性。     

Decision making in the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART): Anterior cingulate cortex signals loss aversion but not the infrequency of risky choices

The inferior frontal gyrus/anterior insula (IFG/AI) and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) are key regions involved in risk appraisal during decision making, but accounts of how these regions contribute to decision making under risk remain contested. To help clarify the roles of these and other related regions, we used a modified version of the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (Lejuez et al., Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 75-84, 2002) to distinguish between decision-making and feedback-related processes when participants decided to pursue a gain as the probability of loss increased parametrically. Specifically, we set out to test whether the ACC and IFG/AI regions correspond to loss aversion at the time of decision making in a way that is not confounded with either reward-seeking or infrequency effects. When participants chose to discontinue inflating the balloon (win option), we observed greater ACC and mainly bilateral IFG/AI activity at the time of decision as the probability of explosion increased, consistent with increased loss aversion but inconsistent with an infrequency effect. In contrast, we found robust vmPFC activity when participants chose to continue inflating the balloon (risky option), consistent with reward seeking. However, in the cingulate and in mainly bilateral IFG regions, blood-oxygenation-level-dependent activation decreased when participants chose to inflate the balloon as the probability of explosion increased, findings that are consistent with a reduced loss aversion signal. Our results highlight the existence of distinct reward-seeking and loss-averse signals during decision making, as well as the importance of distinguishing between decision and feedback signals.     

损失规避源于得失程数多于获得？——损失规避的得失程数变化视角的再检验

刘欢、梁竹苑 和 李纾（2009a）在证明损失规避的得失程数变化视角时所取的损益值取值范围、对安于现状偏差影响的控制以及所选取的得两程失一程和得三程失两程的决策对象这四个方面存在的缺陷。本研究通过弥补上述缺陷并设计无关变量得到更严格控制的得三程失两程的决策情景,对得失程数变化视角重新进行了检验。结果发现,寿命“得一程失一程”的属性并未导致损失规避消失;在广泛的损益值范围内以自由为对象的决策同样表现为损失规避;将自由感知为生而拥有和后天获得的人数大致相当;因而得失程数变化视角需作出重要修正,同时前景理论与情绪预测误差理论亦不可完全预测损失规避出现的条件。     

时间距离对于验证性信息加工的影响

研究基于解释水平理论考察时间距离对于验证性信息加工的影响, 即在个体和组织决策情境中, 人们倾向于偏好选择和高估与自身观点和决策相一致的信息, 而不是非一致性信息。通过4个情境决策实验, 研究结果一致表明近期决策会提高信息搜寻和评估中的验证偏差, 而远期决策会降低它们的验证偏差, 知觉到的决策确定性在其中起到部分中介作用(实验1b)。解释水平(实验2)和期许性/可行性表征(实验3)分别在时间距离对验证性信息加工的影响中起到调节作用, 结果依次表明在低解释水平(高可行性-低期许性特征)条件下, 时间距离与验证性信息加工的负相关关系会得到显著增强, 而在高解释水平(高期许性-低可行性特征)条件下, 时间距离与验证性信息加工的负相关关系会得到显著降低。