青少年情绪预测偏差与决策的关系研究

在决策过程中人们通常选择那些使其感到快乐的行为,决策结果与所预测的高兴或悲伤、满意或不满意紧密相连,以往研究发现这类预测即情绪预测存在偏差。本研究以188名中小学生为被试,采用自编情绪评定表和最后通牒游戏范式,对情绪预测偏差与决策的关系进行探索。结果表明青少年在预测对未来事件的情绪反应时存在强度偏差和持续时间偏差,情绪预测的强度偏差和持续时间偏差影响青少年回避或趋向决策。     

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。     

情感预测偏差的相关研究评述

情感预测是预测将来的情绪状态。情感预测时会表现出各种偏差, 例如免疫性忽略、聚焦错觉和共情鸿沟。本文从认知–体验自我理论和心理模拟的角度对情感预测偏差的原因进行了整合, 对情感预测偏差的个体差异和矫正进行了分析。情感预测的未来研究方向应该从心理-行为机制、进化机制和脑机制几个方面展开。     

特质正念对初中生学业情绪预测偏差的影响

基于真实考试和实验室模拟情境, 考察特质正念对初中生学业情绪预测偏差的影响及其机制。结果表明：(1)学业领域存在情绪预测偏差; (2)特质正念影响情绪预测偏差, 特质正念水平高的初中生情绪预测偏差相对更小, 反之则更大; (3)注意聚焦在特质正念影响情绪预测偏差中存在中介作用。本研究初步提出正念的“扩大-联结”解释模型, 推进了学业领域情绪预测的研究, 具有良好的生态学效度和切实的教育实践价值。     

情绪通路异常与认知情绪偏差:慢性痛与抑郁症共病的神经心理机制

慢性疼痛与抑郁症具有高度共病性,但迄今尚无成熟理论能够阐释二者共病的神经心理机制。对慢性痛与抑郁的脑机制研究提示,慢性痛和抑郁常常涉及到相似的情绪脑区活动的异常改变;与此相对应的是,行为学研究发现,疼痛患者与抑郁患者在加工疼痛或抑郁相关信息时表现出了模式相似的认知情绪偏差(CAB)。近年来,越来越多证据趋于一致,指出慢性痛和抑郁共有的情绪通路异常变化可能导致了相似的信息加工异常,是二者共病的神经心理基础,而认知情绪偏差则在行为上反映了这种变化,并且很可能是共病发生、发展及维持的重要因素。     

人心难读：冲突中的预测偏差及其心理机制

冲突事件是指当事某方采取的行动可能对另一方造成直接且明显的伤害、进而导致紧张关系的事件。拒绝他人请求、反驳他人观点、与他人一起参与竞争等皆有可能诱发冲突。有效的冲突管理有助于减少冲突带来的消极影响,发挥冲突潜在的积极影响。但是,广泛存在的预测偏差严重妨碍了冲突管理。因此,欲解决冲突管理的难题,必须探究人类在冲突中的预测偏差。现有研究多着眼于非冲突中的预测偏差,采取信息驱动的视角,将预测偏差的主要原因归结为人受限于认知上的不足,因而认为预测偏差是一种错误,主要关注其消极影响。然而,现有研究忽视了冲突中的预测偏差的独特性。冲突中,预测偏差可能受人的自我保护动机和避免人际伤害动机驱动自上而下地产生,并具有一定的适应性。 基于对现有研究的总结,本项目旨在突破当前的理论困境,探讨冲突事件中预测偏差的独特规律及其心理机制与后果,具体而言包括四大目标：(1)聚焦冲突事件中的预测偏差,并以对应的非冲突事件作为对照,揭示预测偏差在冲突中独特的表现形式,提出冲突事件的“偏差放大效应”,即与非冲突事件相比,在冲突事件中,预测偏差的程度会被放大,例如反驳他人者对他人的体验产生较大的错误预测,而赞同他人者则相对能更准确地预测他人的体验;(2)从动机性认知视角探讨“偏差放大效应”的心理成因,揭示“负性驱动机制”,即人因为担忧冲突事件的负性结果,出于自我保护的目的而在注意、知觉、思维等认知加工环节把冲突事件的潜在结果加工得更加消极,作最坏的打算以应对冲突;(3)考察“负性驱动机制”下预测偏差导致的后果,如使人采取回避行为,具体表现为人际退缩和不作为等;(4)设计有效的去偏差方案,以直接和间接两种方式改变预测者的动机,进而改变其认知加工,减弱预测偏差。 通过完成以上目标,本项目将构建解释冲突事件中预测偏差的理论模型。该理论模型立足于动机性认知的视角,从现象层面揭示“偏差放大效应”,将负性偏差理论拓展到人际过程中;从机制层面突破信息驱动视角的局限,揭示动机性认知在人际互动中的指导作用;从思想层面基于生态理性观辩证分析预测偏差的适应性作用,促使研究者重新审视“何为理性”。该模型弥补了以往研究忽视动机对预测偏差的影响这一不足,并将预测偏差和负性偏差、动机性认知等理论结合起来,形成了更完整的理论框架。本项目有助于推动对预测偏差的全面理解,发展行为决策理论,帮助公众和社会治理者准确预测他人,提升冲突管理能力,提高决策质量。     

风险决策的概率权重偏差：心理机制与优化策略

概率权重偏差指人对事件发生的主观概率估计与客观概率的差异。它影响投资、投保、医患沟通等方面。“重结果轻概率”的非补偿性策略和参照点诱发的情绪波动会引发概率权重偏差; 改变“概率”的描述形式、“结果”的情绪体验、“损益”的参照点、风险的心理距离等可调整权重偏差、优化决策。未来需深究权重偏差的适用情境、机制关联及偏差辨别等问题。     

情绪对跨期决策的影响

近年来, 情绪对跨期决策的影响逐渐成为一个新的研究趋势。根据情绪发生于跨期决策过程中的时间, 可以将其分为决策前情绪、决策中情绪和决策后情绪。目前关于情绪与跨期决策的研究, 尤其是决策前情绪影响跨期决策的研究, 大多还只是停留在揭示现象的阶段, 较少有研究直接验证其中的影响机制。综合运用行为实验和神经影像学的手段从认知过程和决策过程揭示情绪影响跨期决策的行为机制和神经机制, 将有助于加深对跨期决策心理机制的理解, 并帮助人们更好地利用和控制情绪以做出更满意的决策。未来研究还需加强研究的深度和生态效度, 如考察动态情绪、日常情绪和复杂情绪对跨期决策的影响, 并在情绪干预方面进行更多的尝试和探索。     

大学生依恋与心理弹性——情绪调节与元情绪的多重中介

对982名大学生的依恋、情绪调节策略、元情绪及心理弹性进行测查,考察依恋与心理弹性间关系的内在机制。结构方程模型分析结果显示：（1）依恋、情绪调节与元情绪均能显著预测心理弹性;（2）依恋焦虑通过认知重评和元情绪间接预测心理弹性;（3）依恋回避不但直接负向预测心理弹性,还会通过认知重评和元情绪间接预测心理弹性。本研究结果显示,情绪调节策略和元情绪能够解释依恋与心理弹性间关系的内在机制。     

情感预测中的聚焦错觉

聚焦错觉是个体在进行情感预测时,错误地估计了聚焦事件会对情绪造成影响的一种倾向.聚焦错觉是造成情感预测偏差的重要原因.其心理机制主要包括直觉预测和可得性模型.聚焦错觉的影响因素主要有预测事件的情感效价、性质,情境因素、个体习惯和文化差异等.其应对策略主要有去焦点化和情感平均.未来的研究应从聚焦错觉与忽视情绪适应的关系、聚焦错觉的产生根源以及聚焦错觉与其他聚焦效应的关系等方面来进一步探讨.     

Affective Forecasting Errors in the 2008 Election: Underpredicting Happiness

Individuals tend to be very bad at predicting their emotional responses to future events, often overestimating both the intensity and duration of their responses, particularly to negative events. The authors studied affective forecasting errors in the 2008 election in a large sample of undergraduates at Dartmouth College. Replicating past research, McCain supporters overpredicted their negative affect in response to the (future) election of Barack Obama. Obama supporters, however, underpredicted their happiness in response to his victory. Results are discussed with reference to mechanisms proposed to underlie the impact bias, as well as the unique circumstances surrounding this historic election season.     

Affective forecasting and self-rated symptoms of depression,anxiety, and hypomania: Evidence for a dysphoric forecasting bias

Emerging research has examined individual differences in affective forecasting; however, we are aware of no published study to date linking psychopathology symptoms to affective forecasting problems. Pitting cognitive theory against depressive realism theory, we examined whether dysphoria was associated with negatively biased affective forecasts or greater accuracy. Participants (n=325) supplied predicted and actual emotional reactions for three days surrounding an emotionally evocative relational event, Valentine's Day. Predictions were made a month prior to the holiday. Consistent with cognitive theory, we found evidence for a dysphoric forecasting bias—the tendency of individuals in dysphoric states to overpredict negative emotional reactions to future events. The dysphoric forecasting bias was robust across ratings of positive and negative affect, forecasts for pleasant and unpleasant scenarios, continuous and categorical operationalisations of dysphoria, and three time points of observation. Similar biases were not observed in analyses examining the independent effects of anxiety and hypomania. Findings provide empirical evidence for the long-assumed influence of depressive symptoms on future expectations. The present investigation has implications for affective forecasting studies examining information-processing constructs, decision making, and broader domains of psychopathology.     

Strength of affective reaction as a signal to think carefully

Analytic processes reduce biases, but it is not known how or when these processes will be deployed. Based on an affective signal hypothesis, relatively strong affective reactions were expected to result in increased analytic processing and reduced bias in judgement. The valence and strength of affective reactions were manipulated through varying outcomes in a game or evaluative conditioning of a stimulus. Relatively strong positive or negative affective reactions resulted in less desirability bias. Bias reduction only occurred if participants had time to deploy analytic processes and indicators of the degree of analytic processing (in the form of attentional control) predicted less bias. Affective processes have long been acknowledged as a source of bias, but these findings suggest affective processes are also integral to bias reduction.     

Temporal dynamics of anxiety-related attentional bias: is affective context a missing piece of the puzzle?

Previous research has demonstrated that anxious individuals attend to negative emotional information at the expense of other information. This is commonly referred to as attentional bias. The field has historically conceived of this process as relatively static; however, research by [Zvielli, A., Bernstein, A., &; Koster, E. H. W. (2014). Dynamics of attentional bias to threat in anxious adults: Bias towards and/or away? PLoS ONE, 9(8), e104025; Zvielli, A., Bernstein, A., &; Koster, E. H. W. (2015). Temporal dynamics of attentional bias. Clinical Psychological Science, 3(5), 772–788.], and others, challenges this assumption by demonstrating considerable temporal variability in attentional bias amongst anxious individuals. Still, the mechanisms driving these temporal dynamics are less well known. Using a modified dot-probe task, the present study examined the impact of two relevant contextual variables- affective valence and trial repetition. Affective context was instantiated by the presentation of negative versus neutral pictures before each trial, while repetition context was achieved via the presentation of the valenced pictures in either a blocked- or mixed-trial design. Results indicate that individuals with higher trait-anxiety levels were significantly more influenced by blocked presentations of negative affective information, leading to greater temporal fluctuations in attentional bias. Furthermore, our findings provide additional evidence that attentional bias is best conceptualised as dynamic and variable, and that an individual’s affective experience is one factor that regulates attentional bias dynamics. Implications relating to theoretical and methodological factors are discussed.     

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。