心理距离、封面故事对框架效应的影响

该研究旨在比较志愿决策和“亚洲疾病”决策两种任务领域下,人们风险偏好的特征情况,以考察远、近不同社会距离对风险偏好的影响.同时,在传统的坏封面故事下,增设好封面故事情景,以期发现封面故事作为决策前的必要背景信息对人们决策的影响.选取高中生为被试,结果发现：（1）在近的社会距离下决策时,风险偏好受到时间距离、封面故事、概率和框架的影响;在远的社会距离下,这些因素的影响作用不大;（2）志愿决策中,风险偏好仅在小概率条件下,受封面故事、框架等因素的影响;在好封面故事下,风险偏好受到框架的影响;在坏的封面故事下,风险偏好受时间距离和框架的交互作用影响.     

封面故事、选项框架和损益概率对风险偏好的影响

以股市投资为背景设计决策问题,考查了问题的封面故事类型、备择选项框架和风险项的概率水平对327名股民被试和465名大学生被试的风险偏好的影响。结果表明,股民被试的风险偏好不同于大学生被试,前者在所有实验处理上呈现出稳定的风险回避倾向。大学生被试在不同类型的封面故事下呈现出不同的风险偏好。在传统的坏封面故事下,风险偏好只受到备择选项框架的影响,不受损益概率的影响,即出现经典的框架效应现象。在好封面故事下,风险偏好受到备择选项框架、损益概率及两者交互作用的影响,即在高概率水平上出现框架效应现象,在低概率水平上出现框架效应反转现象     

决策者角色及相关因素对风险偏好的影响

两个实验考察了金钱和时间决策中决策者角色及相关因素对风险偏好的影响。结果发现:(1)两种决策中不同决策者角色都会引起风险偏好反转,人们在为他人决策时更偏向于风险寻求;(2)两种决策中风险偏好的反转都会受到任务框架、风险概率的影响,金钱决策中风险偏好的变化还受金钱数额高低的影响。金钱决策中存在决策者角色×任务框架×风险概率之间的交互作用,时间决策中没有发现这种交互作用。     

风险决策任务中时间距离对框架效应的影响

通过考察中国大学生时间距离的认知相关性,并进而探讨时间距离对风险决策任务加工方式及框架效应的影响.实验一通过问卷调查发现,与发生时间相对较远的事件相比,相对较近的事件,其认知相关性更大,验证了时间距离的认知相关性假设.在此基础上,以时间距离为自变量,设计小同的风险决策任务,考察框架效应发生的可能性(实验二、实验三).结果显示,时间距离近时,框架效应不明显;时间距离远时,框架效应明显.其原因是,发生在相对不远的将来事件引起分析加工模式,导致框架效应的减弱;发生在相对远的将来事件引起整体加工模式,导致框架效应的增强.     

选项框架和认知负载对风险决策的影响

本研究采用实验法探讨了选项框架和认知负载对风险决策的影响。结果发现:(1)不同的认知负载条件下,被试在正向框架下表现出风险回避,负向框架下表现出风险寻求,出现了框架效应现象;(2)相对于认知负载条件下,被试在无认知负载的负向框架下更偏好于风险选项,而正向框架下的风险偏好没有显著变化,即无认知负载条件下框架效应较强。这表明,框架效应不仅仅是启发式系统作用的结果,分析式系统也在其中发挥着重要的作用。     

心理距离与决策者角色对风险决策的影响

采用改编的I0S量表测量自我与他人的心理距离,在收益和损失情境下,综合探讨了为他人和预测他人决策时心理距离对个体风险偏好的影响.结果发现:(1)与他人心理距离越远,个体决策时越偏好风险,且反应时越短;(2)个体预测他人决策时比为他人决策时更偏好风险,但两者反应时没有显著差异;(3)心理距离与决策者角色存在交互作用,即预测时个体认为远心理距离他人比近心理距离他人更冒险,而为他人决策时两者差异消失;(4)决策角色与决策框架、心理距离与决策框架存在交互作用:在收益框架下,自我他人心理距离较远时个体更偏好风险,且个体预测比为他人决策时更冒险,损失条件下无差异.依据相关理论对这些结果进行了分析讨论.     

不确定性容忍度对风险偏好的影响及其情景依赖性

研究以经营店面为背景设计决策材料,采用2(不确定性容忍度:高/低)×2(损益背景:损失/获益)×2(选项描述框架:积极/消极)×3(损益概率:高/中/低)混合实验设计,探讨不同任务情景下个体不确定性容忍度对风险偏好的影响。结果发现,不确定性容忍度主效应显著,高容忍度者比低容忍度者更冒险。不确定性容忍度与损益背景交互作用显著：在损失背景下,高容忍度者比低容忍度者更冒险,在获益背景下无此效应。不确定性容忍度与选项描述框架交互作用显著：在积极框架下,高容忍度者比低容忍度者更冒险,在消极框架下无此效应。这表明,不确定性容忍度对风险偏好产生影响,但这种影响会受到损益背景和选项描述框架的调节,具有情景依赖性。     

认知闭合需要、框架效应与决策偏好

在带有模糊性的决策情境中,决策者个人的认知特征会对其判断决策产生重要影响。通过实验的方法,考察了认知闭合需要和特征框架效应对个体决策偏好的影响。93名工商管理硕士（MBA）参与了实验,研究的结果支持了本研究的3个假设,即认知闭合需要与特征框架效应不仅对被试的决策偏好存在显著的影响,而且二者还存在显著的交互作用。具体来说,研究发现,在模糊情境中：高认知闭合需要的被试偏好于立刻做出决策,而低认知闭合需要的被试偏好于暂缓做出决策;接收到正向框架信息的被试偏好于立刻做出决策,而接收到负向框架信息的被试偏好于暂缓做出决策;认知闭合需要与特征框架对被试的决策偏好还存在显著的交互作用。研究结论为根据个体认知闭合需要的水平来选拔决策者、利用框架效应来影响个体的信息加工方式进而提高决策质量提供了理论依据     

大学生一般结果期待对风险决策偏好的影响

以一般结果期待的双维结构观点为基础,按照一般结果期待的乐观期待和悲观期待的水平将184名大学生样本划分为明显乐观、明显悲观、双重倾向和倾向不明四个类型,进而探讨不同类型大学生在创业投资情境下一般结果期待对风险决策偏好的影响。结果表明,风险概率、描述框架与一般结果期待的交互作用显著,在低风险概率、积极框架下,双重倾向型一般结果期待大学生比其他三个类型的大学生表现出明显的风险寻求偏好。     

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。     

The Effects of Framing, Reflection, Probability, and Payoff on Risk Preference in Choice Tasks

A meta-analysis of Asian-disease-like studies is presented to identify the factors which determine risk preference. First the confoundings between probability levels, payoffs, and framing conditions are clarified in a task analysis. Then the role of framing, reflection, probability, type, and size of payoff is evaluated in a meta-analysis. It is shown that bidirectional framing effects exist for gains and for losses. Presenting outcomes as gains tends to induce risk aversion, while presenting outcomes as losses tends to induce risk seeking. Risk preference is also shown to depend on the size of the payoffs, on the probability levels, and on the type of good at stake (money/property vs human lives). In general, higher payoffs lead to increasing risk aversion. Higher probabilities lead to increasing risk aversion for gains and to increasing risk seeking for losses. These findings are confirmed by a subsequent empirical test. Shortcomings of existing formal theories, such as prospect theory, cumulative prospect theory, venture theory, and Markowitz's utility theory, are identified. It is shown that it is not probabilities or payoffs, but the framing condition, which explains most variance. These findings are interpreted as showing that no linear combination of formally relevant predictors is sufficient to capture the essence of the framing phenomenon.     

不确定性容忍度、损益概率及延迟风险对延迟选择的影响

研究通过两个实验考查了不确定性容忍度及相关变量对延迟选择的影响,其中实验1采用2（不确定性容忍度：高/低）×2（概率水平：高/中）被试间实验设计;研究2将实验任务设定在有延迟风险情景下中等概率水平,采用单因素（不确定性容忍度：高/低）被试间实验设计.实验1结果表明：不确定性容忍度与概率水平存在交互作用：中等概率时,低容忍度个体比高容忍度个体更偏好延迟选择,高概率时,两者的延迟选择无显著差异,都偏好于选择决策.实验2结果表明：在有延迟风险中等概率时,高、低容忍度个体的决策偏好无显著差异,都偏好选择决策.结论：不确定性容忍度对延迟选择存在影响且受概率水平和延迟风险的调节.     

Variables influencing the neural correlates of perceived risk of physical harm

Many human activities involve a risk of physical harm. However, not much is known about the specific brain regions involved in decision making regarding these risks. To explore the neural correlates of risk perception for physical harms, 19 participants took part in an event-related fMRI study while rating risky activities. The scenarios varied in level of potential harm (e.g., paralysis vs. stubbed toe), likelihood of injury (e.g., 1 chance in 100 vs. 1 chance in 1,000), and format (frequency vs. probability). Networks of brain regions were responsive to different aspects of risk information. Cortical language- processing areas, the middle temporal gyrus, and a region around the bed nucleus of stria terminalis responded more strongly to high- harm conditions. Prefrontal areas, along with subcortical ventral striatum, responded preferentially to high- likelihood conditions. Participants rated identical risks to be greater when information was presented in frequency format rather than probability format. These findings indicate that risk assessments for physical harm engage a broad network of brain regions that are sensitive to the severity of harm, the likelihood of risk, and the framing of risk information.     

Continuity and change in the life story: a longitudinal study of autobiographical memories in emerging adulthood

If a person's internalized and evolving life story (narrative identity) is to be considered an integral feature of personality itself, then aspects of that story should manifest some continuity over time while also providing evidence regarding important personality change. Accordingly, college freshmen and seniors provided detailed written accounts of 10 key scenes in their life stories, and they repeated the same procedure 3 months and then 3 years later. The accounts were content analyzed for reliable narrative indices employed in previous studies of life stories: emotional tone, motivational themes (agency, communion, personal growth), and narrative complexity. The results showed substantial continuity over time for narrative complexity and positive (vs. negative) emotional tone and moderate but still significant continuity for themes of agency and growth. In addition, emerging adults (1) constructed more emotionally positive stories and showed (2) greater levels of emotional nuance and self-differentiation and (3) greater understanding of their own personal development in the 4th year of the study compared to the 1st year. The study is the first to demonstrate both temporal continuity and developmental change in narrative identity over time in a broad sampling of personally meaningful life-story scenes.     

Framing experts' (dis)agreements about uncertain environmental events

Agreements and disagreements between expert statements influence lay people's beliefs. But few studies have examined what is perceived as a disagreement. We report six experiments where people rated agreement between pairs of probabilistic statements about environmental events, attributed to two different experts or to the same expert at two different points in time. The statements differed in frame, by focusing on complementary outcomes (45% probability that smog will have negative health effects vs. 55% probability that it will not have such effects), in probability level (45% vs. 55% probability of negative effects), or in both respects. Opposite frames strengthened disagreement when combined with different probability levels. Approximate probabilities can be “framed” in yet another way by indicating reference values they are “over” or “under”. Statements that use different directional verbal terms (over vs. under 50%) indicated greater disagreement than statements with the same directional term but different probability levels (over 50% vs. over 70%). Framing and directional terms similarly affected consistency judgments when both statements were issued by the same expert at different occasions. The effect of framing on perceived agreement was significant for medium (10 and 20 percentage points) differences between probabilities, whereas the effect of directional term was stable for numerical differences up to 40 percentage points. To emphasize agreement between different estimates, they should be framed in the same way. To accentuate disagreements or changes of opinion, opposite framings should be used.     

Whose idea is it anyway? The importance of reputation in acknowledgement

Six‐year‐old children negatively evaluate plagiarizers just as adults do (Olson & Shaw, 2011), but why do they dislike plagiarizers? Children may think plagiarism is wrong because plagiarizing negatively impacts other people's reputations. We investigated this possibility by having 6‐ to 9‐year‐old children evaluate people who shared their own or other people's ideas (stories). In Experiment 1, we found that children consider it acceptable to retell someone else's story if the source is given credit for their story (improving the source's reputation), but not if the reteller claims credit for the story (steals credit away from someone else). Experiments 2 and 3 showed that children do not consider it bad to lie by giving someone else credit for one's own good story (improving someone else's reputation), but do consider it bad to give someone else credit for one's own bad story (improving one's own reputation at the expense of someone else's). Experiment 4 demonstrated that children think it is equally bad to take credit for someone else's idea for oneself as it is to take someone else's idea and give credit to someone else, suggesting that children dislike when others take credit away from someone else, regardless of whether or not it improves the plagiarizer's reputation. Our results suggest that children dislike plagiarism because it negatively affects others' reputations by taking credit away from them.