Precision and accuracy of judgmental estimation

Whereas probabilistic calibration has been a central normative concept of accuracy in previous research on interval estimates, we suggest here that normative approaches for the evaluation of judgmental estimates should consider the communicative interaction between the individuals who produce the judgments and those who receive or use them for making decisions. We analyze precision and error in judgment and consider the role of the accuracy–informativeness trade-off (Yaniv and Foster, 1995) in the communication of estimates. The results shed light on puzzling findings reported earlier in the literature concerning the calibration of subjective confidence intervals. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

中介效应的三类区间估计方法

由于中介效应ab的估计量通常不是正态分布, 因此需用不对称置信区间进行中介效应分析。详述了三类获得不对称置信区间的方法, 包括乘积分布法(M法和经验M法)、Bootstrap方法(偏差校正和未校正的非参数百分位Bootstrap方法、偏差校正和未校正的参数百分位残差Bootstrap方法)和马尔科夫链蒙特卡罗(MCMC)方法。比较了三类方法在单层(简单和多重)和多层中介效应分析中的表现, 发现三类方法的表现相近, 与乘积分布法相比, 偏差校正的百分位Bootstrap方法表现较好, 但有先验信息的MCMC方法能更有效降低均方误。最后对中介效应不对称置信区间研究的拓展方向做了展望。     

bootstrap法在合成分数信度区间估计中的应用

在介绍bootstrap法原理的基础上,本文以一个同质测量模式的模拟数据为例,对结构方程模型下使用bootstrap法对合成分数信度的区间估计的应用中进行了演示。     

When choices give in to temptations: Explaining the disagreement among importance measures

Respondents’ overt statements of relative importance rarely correspond to weights derived from a regression analysis of their decisions. This paper conjectures that differential effects of high-level goals on importance beliefs and choices can explain these discrepancies. It is argued that the goal to justify decisions influences importance beliefs more than choices whereas the goal to assess preferences accurately affects choices more than importance beliefs. It is also argued that differential effects of high-level goals on importance statements and choices vary as a function of whether decision-maker controls the information flow and the extent of prior knowledge and experiences with choice options. These predictions were tested within the context of a contraceptive decision-making task. Choices among contraceptives made the justification goal salient to subjects by requiring tradeoffs between attributes that are either considered rational or tempting in making such decisions (e.g., health risks vs. pleasure/convenience). As predicted, subjects assigned larger importance weights to rational attributes in their subjective evaluations than in their choices whereas the impact of tempting attributes was stronger for choices than for subjective importance evaluations. Moreover, these observed discrepancies between importance measures were reduced in favor of rational attributes when subjects controlled the information flow and could not access their prior experiences. Overall, the results suggest that, although tempting attributes affect choices, decision makers appear to be unwilling to acknowledge the impact of tempting attributes on their decisions in judging attribute importance.     

用Delta法估计多维测验合成信度的置信区间

大量研究表明,一般情况下用合成信度可以较好地估计测验信度。对于合成信度及其置信区间的估计方法,在单维测验的情形已有不少研究。但罕有研究讨论多维测验合成信度的区间估计方法。本文用Delta法推导出计算多维测验合成信度的标准误公式,进而计算置信区间,并用一个例子说明如何编程估计多维测验合成信度及其置信区间。     

Mnemonic emotion regulation: a three-process model

Emotion regulation comprises attempts to influence when and how emotions are experienced and expressed. It has mostly been conceived of as proactive (e.g. situation selection) or reactive (e.g. attentional distraction), but it may also be retroactive and involve memory. I term such past-oriented activity mnemonic emotion regulation and propose that it involves increasing or decreasing access to or altering the characteristics of a memory. People may increase access to a memory and make it more likely that it will be retrieved in the future, for example by rehearsing a pleasant memory. They may decrease access to a memory and make it less likely that intrusions will be experienced in the future, for example by repeatedly trying to stop an unpleasant memory from being retrieved. Finally, people may alter the characteristics of a memory and change its content or context, for example by replacing a negative impression with a productive interpretation. I discuss how mnemonic emotion regulation may be instigated (e.g. via elaborate rehearsal) as well as the different motives (e.g. hedonic motives) people may have for engaging in regulation. Also, I discuss possible benefits of, variations in, and improvements of mnemonic emotion regulation.     

Manipulating memory associations changes decision-making preferences in a preconditioning task

Memories of past experiences can guide our decisions. Thus, if memories are undermined or distorted, decision making should be affected. Nevertheless, little empirical research has been done to examine the role of memory in reinforcement decision-making. We hypothesized that if memories guide choices in a conditioning decision-making task, then manipulating these memories would result in a change of decision preferences to gain reward. We manipulated participants’ memories by providing false feedback that their memory associations were wrong before they made decisions that could lead them to win money. Participants’ memory ratings decreased significantly after receiving false feedback. More importantly, we found that false feedback led participants’ decision bias to disappear after their memory associations were undermined. Our results suggest that reinforcement decision-making can be altered by false feedback on memories. The results are discussed using memory mechanisms such as spreading activation theories.     

Romantic attachment,dyadic coping,and parental adjustment across the transition to parenthood

This study explored the mediating role of common dyadic coping (common DC) on the longitudinal associations between attachment‐related anxiety and avoidance and parental adjustment to the first year postpartum. A total of 92 Portuguese couples completed self‐report questionnaires of romantic attachment, common DC, parenting stress, and parental confidence. Results showed that more avoidant parents (at mid‐pregnancy) engaged less in common DC (at 6 weeks postpartum), which consequently increased their partner's parenting stress (only in mothers) and decreased their partner's parental confidence (in both parents) at 6–9 months postpartum. Anxious attachment did not predict parents' adjustment directly or indirectly. Interventions aimed at preventing adjustment difficulties to early parenthood in more avoidant parents should focus on enhancing their common DC strategies soon after childbirth.