判断与决策中的规划谬误

规划谬误是指人们在估计未来任务的完成时间时, 倾向于过度乐观, 低估任务完成时间的一种现象。规划谬误的心理机制主要包括规划谬误理论和记忆偏差理论。规划谬误的影响因素主要有认知因素、动机因素、个体的经验水平、目标任务的性质等。规划谬误的应对策略主要有与过去的经验相联系、从第三人称视角进行估计、任务分解及时间分配。未来的研究主要从规划谬误与策略性误解、乐观偏差、过分自信的关系, 规划谬误的产生根源、规划谬误的跨文化研究、规划谬误的研究范围及应用领域等方面进一步探讨。     

事件时间估计偏差理论述

人们总是倾向低估完成某一任务的时间。计划谬误理论认为,时间低估倾向的原因是人们估计时间时忽视过去完成类似任务的经验,过于关注理想的任务计划和任务情景,从而导致乐观的时间估计。但是基于该理论的一些提高时间估计精确性的策略没有达到预期效果。针对这种不足,记忆偏差理论认为,人们利用的时间记忆带有偏差,从而导致偏差的时间估计。两个理论之间引起一些争论,但如果从解释水平理论的角度可以找到其相通之处     

消极刺激相似性对幼儿未来事件认知的影响

通过两项实验探讨了重遇刺激与过去消极刺激的相似性是如何影响幼儿对未来事件中个体情绪判断的。相似性被划分为重遇刺激与过去刺激完全相同、表面相似及本质相似三种水平。结果表明:当重遇刺激与过去消极刺激完全相同时,被试预测的消极情绪最多,其次是本质相似,表面相似情况下被试预测的消极情绪最少。本研究得出结论为消极刺激相似性会影响幼儿对未来事件的认知,重遇刺激与过去消极刺激越相似幼儿的消极情绪越多。     

时间的计划方式对任务完成时间预测的影响

采用情境测验方式,考察时间的计划方式对任务完成时间预测的影响。结果发现:(1)倒计时计划方式相比正计时计划方式能预测较迟的任务完成时间;(2)计划过程测量显示,倒计时计划方式促使被试采用新的角度对目标任务的计划安排过程进行思考,进而做出更符合实际的时间预测;(3)目标任务的类型影响个体对任务完成时间的预测。结论:时间的计划方式影响个体对任务完成时间的预测,倒计时计划方式对任务完成时间的预测更符合完成任务的时间要求。     

平滑追踪眼动及其对运动物体时空特征表征和预测的影响

平滑追踪眼动是人们对环境中感兴趣的运动物体进行持续视觉追踪的一种眼动行为, 它受个体在其过程中获得的视觉信息和眼动反馈信息等感知觉因素, 以及心理表征和期待等高水平认知因素的影响。同时, 平滑追踪眼动过程影响着个体的预测性眼动追踪、追赶性眼跳、空间定位和接触时间估计等涉及运动物体时空特征表征和预测的行为。未来的研究应注意探讨在平滑追踪眼动过程中获得的感知觉信息和高水平认知因素对上述时空特征表征和预测行为的影响。     

分时距认知特点的研究

本研究探讨了分时距估计的认知特点,检验了SS模型、PT模型和CS模型的预测效度,结果表明：分时距估计主要是在信息提取阶段采用分段推算策略对时间信息进行重建的过程,变化／分割和注意分配对分时距估计有显著影响;SS模型的预测效度最低,PT、CS模型的预测效度较高。     

短时距估计中刺激物的动态变化效应

用两个实验考查了时距估计中刺激物的动态变化效应。结果发现,刺激物的运动、速度和旋转角度显著地影响着被试的时间判断,刺激物速度的时距延长效应对于较长时距(18s-24s)来说更加明显;运动刺激与较短、较准确的时距判断相关联;旋转角度的减少使得被试低估时距,而旋转角度的增加使得时距估计呈高估倾向。被试在时间估计过程中表现出长时距低估和短时距高估现象,本研究得到的时间估计转换点是11.4s,此点与先前的有关研究基本一致。     

事后聪明式偏差的理论模型及影响因素

事后聪明式偏差是指人们在得知事件结果后,会因记忆扭曲、对自身预测能力或事件发生必然性的需要的诱发,而表现出过高估计自己在事前预测能力的现象。许多研究表明,该偏差普遍存在于实验和真实情境中,很难通过实施策略而减小。该现象的理论模型主要基于认知过程和社会性动机,影响因素有研究方法、个人特质、能力变量、年龄因素、个人相关度和事件效价,在未来研究中应注重对理论的整合以及校正策略在应用中的探索     

分析思维降低情感预测影响偏差

人们在决策前需要对决策可能带来的结果进行预测。人们往往会高估未来事件对情感的影响, 这被称为影响偏差。本研究从双系统理论出发, 考察了分析思维是否会降低情感预测影响偏差。实验1(采用图片启动)和实验2(采用语言流畅性任务)考察了分析思维对影响偏差的影响, 并分析了情感预测程度的中介作用。实验3在现场中以真实的决策(生育二孩)为例, 考察了分析思维启动对情感预测的影响。结果发现:分析思维会降低情感预测强度, 进而降低影响偏差。     

不知何时你成为了计划的旁观者

<正>在当前社会环境中，每个人似乎都很忙，每个人都想要在有限的时间里高效和专注地完成更多的小事情，于是越来越多有自我提升需求的人开始对自己的时间进行管理，制订各种各样的长期计划、短期计划。完成这些计划会带来很高的成就感和愉悦感，完不成就难免觉得沮丧和焦虑，而长期不能完成计划则会降低自我效能感，不利于个体的心理健康。事实上，总是完不成制订的计划或许并不是因为个人的执行力差，而是因为总是估计不准任务完成所需要的时间，而往往为未来安排过多的任务。也就是出现计划谬误。     

Remembered duration: working memory and the reproduction of intervals

On the basis of attention allocation models of time estimation, the role of working memory in prospective duration reproduction is explored. In four experiments, adult participants performed a counting task (duration, 400 sec) that allowed coordinative and sequential demands on working memory to be varied. After completing the counting task, the participants reproduced the time that they had worked on this task It emerged that (1) increased coordinative demands on working memory (but not increased sequential demands) reduced the accuracy of prospective duration reproduction (Experiments 1 and 2), (2) presenting context information during the reproduction phase enhanced the accuracy of the reproduced duration (Experiment 3), and (3) individual differences in coordinative working memory capacity affected duration reproduction in the same direction as the experimental manipulation of coordinative task demands (Experiment 4). The results suggest that attention allocation models of time estimation may benefit from taking a more differentiated view of the types of attentional demands that affect temporal cognition.     

Anchoring in time estimation

In two experiments, an anchoring account of the misestimation of future task duration was tested. This account states that such misestimation occurs because previous task duration serves as an anchor for predictions, leading to underestimation when a longer task follows a shorter one and overestimation when a shorter task follows a longer one. Before estimating the duration of a focal task, participants selected a figure (anchor) of a longer or shorter duration produced by other participants in previous research on the same task (Experiment 1) or a different task (Experiment 2). In both experiments, misestimation differed according to the relative duration of the anchor to the focal task. Underestimation occurred with the shorter anchor and overestimation occurred with the longer one, suggesting that estimates were distorted in the direction of the anchors. This finding is discussed in relation to the role of prior task experience in moderating this anchoring effect.     

Individual differences in need for cognition and decision making in the Iowa Gambling Task

Differences in decision making between individuals differing in Need for Cognition (NFC) are examined using the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). Previous work using normative one time decisions suggests that individual low in NFC process gains and losses differently than those high in NFC and are more susceptible to decision biases. The IGT is a popular laboratory task that involves making risky decisions from experience involving both gains and losses. In the first experiment, low NFC participants performed significantly worse than the high NFC participants. A second experiment designed to examine the nature of these differences provides evidence that low NFC participants place more importance on gains as opposed to losses when performing the IGT. Results are discussed in light of previous work suggesting that low NFC participants place more importance on losses in mixed outcome decisions.     

Don’t interrupt me! Task interruption depletes the self’s limited resources

It is a common occurrence in daily life to be interrupted prior to completing a task. Such interruptions may have deleterious effects for limited self-resources, especially if they occur just prior to task completion. This hypothesis was tested in three experiments. In the first two, participants initially engaged in a card sorting task, and then subsequently performed a self-control task. In Experiment 3, participants first engaged in a word search task and then worked on an executive function task. In all instances, participants who were interrupted just prior to attaining their goal of completing the initial task, but not those who were stopped earlier in the task or who were allowed to finish, showed evidence of impairment on the subsequent measures. The findings suggest that the desire to pursue a goal increases as goal attainment draws nearer, and that the amount of self-control needed to stop working on a task is modified by situational variables such as goal distance.     

Processing two tasks with varying task order: central stage duration influences central processing order

In a recent study, Sigman and Dehaene (2006, PLoS Biology, 4, 1227–1238) reported that perceptual processing duration influences processing order of two tasks in the psychological refractory period paradigm (PRP). The present study examines whether the duration of central processes also influences processing order. For this purpose, we employed letter tasks with different central processing durations and varied task order in the PRP. In one part of the experiment, a tone discrimination task was combined with a similar time-consuming letter discrimination task. In the other part, the tone task was combined with a more time-consuming letter task, which required a mental rotation of the letter thereby prolonging central processing. If the duration of central processes influences processing order, participants should perform the tone task first more often when it is presented with the more time-consuming mental rotation task, than when it is presented with the similar time-consuming letter task. The results clearly confirm this prediction and thus show that not only perceptual processing duration but also central processing duration affects processing order in a dual-task situation. We suggest that the reported effect mirrors a tendency of participants to minimize total reaction time to both tasks by reducing slack time.     

Is the interference between memory processing and timing specific to the use of verbal material?

Increasing load in a memory task performed simultaneously with a timing task shortens perceived time, an effect that has been observed previously with memory tasks using verbal material. The present experiments examine whether two similar memory tasks, one in which verbal material is used and another one in which nonverbal material is used, would produce similar interference effects on concurrent time reproduction. In Experiment 1, the number of nonverbal stimuli (pseudo‐random dot patterns) was manipulated in a memory task performed while a temporal interval to be reproduced was encoded. Reproductions shortened proportionally to the duration of memory processing executed during time estimation. Verbal stimuli (consonants) were used in Experiment 2 in otherwise identical experimental conditions. Effects observed in Experiment 2 were comparable to those obtained in Experiment 1. Taken together, these results support the notion that interference from memory tasks on concurrent time estimation is not determined by the specific type of material processed in memory, but instead by the duration of memory processing.     

Is the interference between memory processing and timing specific to the use of verbal material?

Increasing load in a memory task performed simultaneously with a timing task shortens perceived time, an effect that has been observed previously with memory tasks using verbal material. The present experiments examine whether two similar memory tasks, one in which verbal material is used and another one in which nonverbal material is used, would produce similar interference effects on concurrent time reproduction. In Experiment 1, the number of nonverbal stimuli (pseudo-random dot patterns) was manipulated in a memory task performed while a temporal interval to be reproduced was encoded. Reproductions shortened proportionally to the duration of memory processing executed during time estimation. Verbal stimuli (consonants) were used in Experiment 2 in otherwise identical experimental conditions. Effects observed in Experiment 2 were comparable to those obtained in Experiment 1. Taken together, these results support the notion that interference from memory tasks on concurrent time estimation is not determined by the specific type of material processed in memory, but instead by the duration of memory processing.     

Exploring the time prediction process: the effects of task experience and complexity on prediction accuracy

Whilst considerable research shows that people tend to underestimate their task completion times, there is little research concerning factors that mediate the time prediction process. In Experiments 1 to 3 a simple, well‐structured task, the 3‐disk Tower of Hanoi, showed no evidence of underestimation; in fact, participants consistently overestimated the duration of this task. However, predictions were more accurate among participants who acquired some task experience beforehand. Task complexity was also found to be an important factor since the more cognitively complex 4‐ and 5‐disk versions produced less biased predictions. Using a cognitively undemanding disk movement task, we found a general temporal overestimation in Experiment 4, thus suggesting that task duration might be responsible for the general lack of underestimation in the present studies. These results have implications for the planning of tasks in everyday life, and also suggest conditions under which time prediction accuracy can be improved. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

虚拟路径整合的学习效应

路径整合指通过自身运动信息对自身位置进行更新的过程。本研究使用头盔式虚拟现实系统和分段式迷宫, 在两个实验中检验在同样布局的外出路径上重复地进行路径完成任务是否会改善被试的反应表现。实验1中的外出路径具有相对较简单的空间布局, 实验结果表明, 男性和女性被试均在反应时、位置误差、角度误差上表现出了学习效应, 即第二次在同样空间布局的外出路径上进行路径完成任务时的表现比第一次有了显著的改善。实验2中的外出路径具有更复杂多样化的空间布局, 而实验结果表明, 男性和女性被试均在反应时和比例位置误差上表现出了学习效应, 但是路径更复杂时要求更多次数的重复才可以提高路径整合成绩。这些研究结果为路径整合能力训练的可行性提供了初步的实证依据。     

Preferences for token exchange‐production schedules: Effects of task difficulty and token‐production schedules

Previous research suggests that accumulated exchange‐production schedules promote increased work completion and are more preferred than distributed exchange‐production schedules. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the response effort or token‐production schedules associated with token delivery influenced preferences for exchange‐production schedules. Tokens exchanged under accumulated schedules were more preferred, relative to distributed schedules, when tokens were earned for completing easy tasks. When participants earned tokens for completing difficult tasks, two of three participants preferred accumulated exchange‐production schedules (Experiment 1). Under dense token‐production schedules, accumulated exchange‐production schedules were preferred, but participant's preferences switched to distributed schedules under increasing token‐production (i.e., leaner) schedules (Experiment 2).