Framing and the Role of the Second Actor: An Application of Prospect Theory to Bargaining

An actor's frame of reference significantly affects that actor's risk attitude. Although the frame of reference is often taken as a given, earlier work shows it to be the result of an actor's assumptions and beliefs, which can be manipulated by a second actor in a bargaining situation. As modeled here, confidence in selected assumptions can be manipulated by one of two means: changing the confidence of the actor about the future domain, and getting the actor to adopt a particular domain by discounting the utility of a course of action. Both methods force a change in the perceived domain and a shift in risk attitude. In addition to showing manipulation of an actor's frame, the model adds to our understanding of Kahneman and Tversky's original expression of prospect theory.     

The Prospects for Prospect Theory: An Empirical Evaluation of International Relations Applications of Framing and Loss Aversion

International relations theorists have tried to adapt prospect theory to make it relevant to the study of real-world decision-making and testable beyond the constraints of the laboratory. Three experiments with undergraduate samples were conducted in an effort to clarify the advantages and limitations of prospect theory as adapted to explain political behavior. The first experiment tested hypotheses regarding the impact of prospect framing on group polarization, but these were only weakly supported. The second and third experiments examined alternative adaptations of the concept of framing; the results suggest that the political science expansion of the concept of framing may, under certain conditions, produce clear and robust preference reversals.     

基于预期理论的参照依赖

参照依赖是指个体基于某一参照点对得失价值进行判断:参照点之上,个体感受为收益,反之即为损失.参照依赖现象广泛存在于生活中的各种领域.当前,对参照依赖心理机制的解释主要有预期理论、后悔理论和三阶段参照点理论.参照依赖的影响因素主要包括经验、情绪状态、文化、目标和认知对象的特点等.未来的研究应主要集中于参照依赖的产生根源,深入探讨参照依赖的神经机制,加强动态参照点、多重参照点以及群体中参照依赖现象的研究.     

前景理论视角下结构化面试问题的设计

前景理论回答了类似应聘者在结构化面试中所面临的不确定场景下,人们是如何决策并行动的问题。论文采用思辨方法就结构化面试问题设计中如何恰当应用前景理论的基本要．董,有效提高结构化面试效度进行了探讨,结论如下：1）问题句子越短、问题越具体,效度有望越高;2）问题导向性要与岗位胜任特征充分契合;3）回溯性行为面试问题效度要高于虚拟情景面试问题;4）由于年龄、性别及个体认知能力等方面的差异,问题设计不仅要因需而变,也要因人而异。     

决策的三参照点理论:从原理到应用

三参照点理论(Tri-Reference Point Theory,Wang,2008a; Wang& Johnson,2012)以底线、现状和目标为参照点,将决策结果空间划分为失败、损失、获益和成功4个功能区域.根据3个参照点的心理权重的排序:底线＞目标＞现状,该模型继而推导出跨越不同区域的以现状为分界的双S-型的价值函数,以及据此产生的对于跨越不同参照点的预期结果的偏好转换、和损失-获益及失败-成功的两种不对称性.总之,风险决策的基本任务在于,在使得达到目标的可能性最大化的同时使底线不保的可能性最小化.三参照点理论将统计学和金融学中的均值与方差(均差)分析与行为决策研究中的参照点效应有机地结合在一起;在面对不同的风险选项时,通过分析各个预期结果的均差分布与3个参照点之间的关系作出适应性的决策.本文介绍了三参照点理论的基本推论、运行原则、实证检验、以及它与期望效用理论和前景理论相比较的异同之处.同时我们也探讨了三参照点理论对实践中管理决策的指导意义和多重启示.     

基于预期理论的风险决策的神经机制

预期理论基于对期望效用理论的批判与发展,提出了价值函数与权重函数,对以往风险决策研究中所发现的现象进行了很好的预测与解释。预期理论的核心概念包括参照依赖、损失规避与权重函数。基于预期理论的一些决策偏差包括框架效应、禀赋效应和默认偏差也部分揭示了与人们风险决策有关的脑区。近年来,通过采用功能性核磁共振等脑成像手段对预期理论的一些核心成分进行的研究表明,涉及到人们风险决策的脑区主要有前额叶、纹状体、脑岛与杏仁核。未来的研究可以从预期理论的产生根源、个体发展以及遗传基因等角度进行进一步的探讨。     

Voice and Culture: A Prospect Theory Approach

The present study examines the congruence of individuals' minimum preferred amounts of voice with the prospect theory value function across nine countries. Accounting for previously ignored minimum preferred amounts of voice and actual voice amounts integral to testing the steepness of gain and loss functions explicated in prospect theory, we use curve fitting to show that ratings of procedural justice fit prospect theory's value function specifically. Further, we investigate the form of this function across nine countries that range in power distance. Results suggest that the form of the value function is congruent with prospect theory, showing an S‐shaped curve that is steeper in the loss than in the gain domain. Further, this pattern is similar across countries. Theoretical and practical implications of these results for both decision making and organizational justice are discussed. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Crossing No Man's Land: Cooperation From the Trenches

This paper represents an attempt to bridge the gap between rational and psychological models of choice, as represented by expected utility theory and prospect theory, and to show how researchers from different traditions can start to work together on problems of interest to both. A central issue for both models concerns the origin of preferences and how they might be predicted. Two questions of interest to all social scientists are related to the formation of preferences: What determines what people want, and what determines what people do once they know what they want? The incorporation of emotion into models of decision‐making may help users of divergent models find common ground for exploration and investigation.     

Support and Nonsupport for Nationalist Rebellion: A Prospect Theory Approach

Prospect theory has been advanced as one way to link intentional rebellious action and the influence of social conditions on individual decisions to support such action. This study extends the application of prospect theory by explaining tendencies toward action or inaction among individuals within identical social contexts. Put simply, the way in which people define reference points has an effect on how they perceive violent options. These perceptions may invoke inaction biases among members of a constituent community. This explanation is explored with illustrative examples drawn from interviews with individuals who supported or did not support rebellious action in Northern Ireland (in 1998) and in the West Bank and Gaza Strip (in 1999). The interview data suggest that territorial demands are an important factor in how rebellious options are perceived.     

Deterrence, Compellence, and Prospect Theory

Deterrence and compellence couple demands for inaction and action, respectively, to a threat of sanctions. Conventional wisdom holds that deterrence requires less coercive effort than compellence, yet expected utility theory contradicts this claim. Only if exogenous factors affect these situations in a systematic and asymmetrical manner will the claim hold within expected utility theory. Prospect theory provides a systematic and endogenous account for this claim. Experimental findings suggest the degree of effort required to obtain compliance in comparable deterrence and compellence situations. Deterrence is "easier" than compellence, but this relationship is variable. Deterrence requires less effort than expected, and the relative effort it requires decreases substantially as the stakes demanded and costs threatened grow. Compellence requires more effort than expected, and the relative effort it requires decreases slightly as the stakes demanded and costs threatened grow.     

The Implications of Prospect Theory for Human Nature and Values

Central to prospect theory are far-reaching claims about what people fear and what gratifies them. Subjective well-being is a topic that social science has been reluctant to discuss in recent years, but it is central to much of our lives. A loss inflicts more harm than a comparable gain produces pleasure; this fact and the related endowment effect are important parts of our psychological makeup. The importance of change rather than absolute value position, and the related significance of the reference point and how it can be altered, can be seen as integral to human nature.     

Revisiting the Gain–Loss Separability Assumption in Prospect Theory

A fundamental assumption of prospect theory is gain–loss separability (GLS)—the assertion that the overall utility of a prospect can be expressed as a function of the utilities of its positive and negative components. Violations of GLS may potentially limit the generalization of results from studies of single‐domain prospects to mixed prospects and systematically distort the predictions of the theory. Violations also have implications for how choices with positive and negative components should be presented to decision makers. Previous studies, using different elicitation methods, have documented different rates, and types, of systematic violations of GLS. We discuss the differences between two specific elicitation methods—binary choice and certainty equivalents—and report results of a new study of GLS using both methods and randomly generated prospects. We compare the extent and nature of GLS violations under the two elicitation methods using between‐subject and within‐subject analyses. We find (i) systematic violations of GLS under both methods, (ii) higher rates of violations under choice, (iii) higher sensitivity to the outcomes for the certainty equivalents, which is consistent with the predictions of the scale‐compatibility hypothesis, and (iv) different patterns of violations under the two methods, which are explained by method‐specific preferences. We discuss the psychological mechanisms underlying the findings and the implications for presenting information with gain and loss components. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

风险决策中的双参照点效应

以预期理论为代表的决策理论认为, 决策者自身的损益状态对风险决策有重要作用, 因此, 将决策者的现状定义为个人参照点。它决定了决策情境是个人获益还是个人损失。个人参照点直接关乎决策者实际的得失, 具有直接性、真实性和绝对性的特征。然而, 社会比较理论认为, 与他人的比较结果同样对风险决策具有不可忽视的意义。因此, 将他人的状态定义为社会参照点。自身的现状与他人状态相比较的结果决定了决策情境是社会获益还是社会损失。社会参照点无关决策者的实际得失, 具有间接性、假设性和相对性的特征。社会参照点通过自我概念、情绪、认知等路径作用于风险决策。更为重要的是, 社会参照点和个人参照点同时存在于风险决策过程中, 决策者对两者的心理感受和行为倾向具有相似性, 因此两者将共同影响决策者的风险选择。基于此, 本文提出风险决策中的双参照点效应。有关双参照点对风险决策过程的影响机制还需进一步的探讨。     

Framing Political Risks: Individual Differences and Loss Aversion in Personal and Political Situations

People are motivated to avoid losses. In the context of politics, studies consistently show that the threat of losses increases support for risky public policies more than the promise of gains. Here, we predict that this loss aversion is calibrated by individual differences related to one’s ability to accommodate resource loss, and we investigate how these individual differences moderate reactions to the threat of losses and the promise of gains. Results from large-N experiments consistently demonstrate that this moderation effect crucially depends on whether the resource loss relates to oneself or one’s group—whether the setting is personal or political. Consistent with classic assumptions, individuals with inferior abilities to cope with resource loss are more loss averse in personal settings. In political settings where group resources are threatened, effects reverse: Individuals with superior resources and a more central position within the group consistently respond more to the prospect of loss. As discussed, these findings have important implications for our understanding of why and for whom the threat of loss motivates risky personal and political choices. By consequence, the findings also shed novel light on the psychological underpinnings of recent risky political events.      

我国近十年来汉语阅读障碍研究回顾与展望

发展性阅读障碍（developmentaldyslexia,DD）是一种严重的学习障碍。文章回顾了l996~2006年间中国内地作者发表的有关汉语DD的实证性文章,发现我国学者近十年来对汉语DD的研究主要包括DD的诊断筛选、亚型分析、认知特点和认知神经机制研究、教育干预等几个方面。文章同时探讨了现有研究中存在的不足,如诊断标准不统一;研究领域比较狭窄;缺乏有效的干预模式和实证研究等,最后提出了研究的发展趋势和未来研究方向     

公共决策中的框架效应：理论解释及影响因素

公共决策中的框架效应是指在公共决策情境中, 人们的决策行为受媒体或领导人对同一问题的框架表述形式的影响而表现出不同决策偏好的现象。目前, 研究者对这一现象的解释主要有预期理论、查询理论和模糊痕迹理论。公共决策中框架效应的影响因素主要包括价值取向、知识水平、人际沟通、情绪以及框架的特征等。未来的研究需要从公共决策中框架效应的理论解释及神经机制、跨文化研究以及研究方式和应对策略等方面进一步探讨。     

Model Building With Prospect Theory: A Cognitive Approach to International Relations

Despite the growing call for new models of politics grounded in the capacities of real–world decision–makers, much international relations theory still incorporates rationalist assumptions. Scholars defend such assumptions as the best way to produce parsimonious theoretical structures. Recent attempts to deploy prospect theory in the study of international politics are consistent with the call for empirically grounded models of political behavior. However, past attempts have often emphasized individualized comparisons of prospect theory with rational choice at the expense of building deductive theory. The analysis here demonstrates that prospect theory can produce deductive models for empirical comparison with those already manufactured under rational choice. The result is a new set of propositions concerning international politics securely anchored to the actual capacities of human actors.     

民众收入不公平感的机制与对策——基于参照依赖和损失规避双视角

近年来,贫富差距的不断加大已引起民众较为强烈的收入不公平感,而导致收入不公平感产生的一个主要原因是人们对自己收入所得不如他人的相对比较。本项目基于预期理论价值函数的参照依赖和损失规避双视角,对当前民众收入不公平感的形成机制与管理对策进行系列实证研究;采用心理测量、实验室实验和干预研究相结合的方法,并借助神经电生理的ERP技术和心理生理学的多导生理记录仪(SCR),以检验民众收入不公平感的自我-他人参照、单参照点-多参照点比较的整合性参照依赖框架;探索损失规避对多得不均等和少得不均等的非对称不公平感的根源性作用和神经生理机制;选取社区居民,操纵参照对象、参照点和得失框架,进行多轮次和多变量的干预研究,以探索减少民众收入不公平感的应对策略,并据此提出切实有效的管理对策。     

Modeling the Impact of Control on the Attractiveness of Risk in a Prospect Theory Framework

Many decisions involve a degree of personal control over event outcomes, which is exerted through one's knowledge or skill. In three experiments we investigated differences in decision making between prospects based on a) the outcome of random events and b) the outcome of events characterized by control. In Experiment 1, participants estimated certainty equivalents (CEs) for bets based on either random events or the correctness of their answers to U.S. state population questions across the probability spectrum. In Experiment 2, participants estimated CEs for bets based on random events, answers to U.S. state population questions, or answers to questions about 2007 NCAA football game results. Experiment 3 extended the same procedure as Experiment 1 using a within-subjects design. We modeled data from all experiments in a prospect theory framework to establish psychological mechanisms underlying decision behavior. Participants weighted the probabilities associated with bets characterized by control so as to reflect greater risk attractiveness relative to bets based on random events, as evidenced by more elevated weighting functions under conditions of control. This research elucidates possible cognitive mechanisms behind increased risk taking for decisions characterized by control, and implications for various literatures are discussed.     

当今情绪研究视角中的阿诺德情绪理论

阿诺德情绪理论的广度和深度及其对当今情绪研究的诸多问题所提供的智慧与启发,有待情绪研究者重新审视。在当今情绪研究领域,阿诺德情绪理论依然具有强大的生命力和影响力。该文综合相关文献和个人的理解,对阿诺德情绪理论中的一些我国读者未尽其详的论题及其对当今情绪研究的影响作概要述评