Choices and opportunities: another effect of framing on decisions

Many decisions can be framed either as ‘choices’ between alternative courses of action (e.g. Should I move to New York or stay in Chicago?) or as ‘opportunities’ to pursue a particular course of action (i.e. Should I move to New York?). Although there is no logical difference between these two different decision frames, there may be important psychological differences between them. In four studies, we explore the differences between ‘choices’ and ‘opportunities’. The results of Studies 1 and 2 show that college students view many of the decisions they typically face as opportunities, rather than choices. Further, the results of Study 2 suggest that the frame students adopt is systematically related to the preferences they express. The latter finding led to Studies 3 and 4, where we show that preferences can be influenced by encouraging people to adopt one decision frame rather than another. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

多时点结果跨期选择的决策效应及其心理机制

多时点结果跨期选择涉及两个及两个以上多个时点结果的权衡, 正日益成为跨期选择的研究重点。现有研究主要从两时点结果和序列结果两方面深入探讨了多时点结果跨期选择中的诸多决策效应, 包括：隐藏的零效应、象征效应、额外金额效应、前端金额效应以及序列效应, 并运用序列模型和权衡模型对上述决策效应进行阐释。未来还应深入探索同时涉及损益结果混合的多时点结果跨期选择, 运用决策过程追踪技术揭示决策效应的过程机制。     

Effects of self–other decision-making on time-based intertemporal choice

The effects of self–other decision-making on intertemporal choice have been revealed in many studies using a monetary outcome. However, the outcome of intertemporal choice is not restricted to money; time is also a scarce and nonrenewable resource outcome. Thus, we conducted a series of experiments to address the effects of self–other decision-making on time-based intertemporal choice, a type of intertemporal choice that uses time as an outcome. Over the course of three experiments, differences in self–other decision-making were evidenced. Participants who made decisions for others were more likely to prefer the smaller but sooner (SS) option over the larger but later (LL) option and considered the gain of the SS option to be significantly greater than that of the LL option. Participants who made decisions for themselves were likely to prefer the LL option over the SS option. However, they considered the gains of the LL and the SS option to be indifferent. Changing the role of decision-making could affect the ability of individuals to consider the future consequences of their decisions. The effects of self–other decision-making on time-based intertemporal choice could be explained by the accounts of economic reasoning and construal level theory. The findings indicated that the effects of self–other decision-making on time-based intertemporal choice, which could be generated simply by rewording questions, can help individuals make optimal long-term choices without the need for increased control.     

The gap between medical and monetary choices under risk persists in decisions for others

Decisions under risk in the medical domain have been found to systematically diverge from decisions in the monetary domain. When making choices between monetary options, people commonly rely on a decision strategy that trades off outcomes with their probabilities; when making choices between medical options, people tend to neglect probability information. In two experimental studies, we tested to what extent differences between medical and monetary decisions also emerge when the decision outcomes affect another person. Using a risky choice paradigm for medical and monetary decisions, we compared hypothetical decisions that participants made for themselves to decisions for a socially distant other (Study 1) and to recommendations as financial advisor or doctor (Study 2). In addition, we examined people's information search in a condition in which information about payoff distributions had to be learned from experiential sampling. Formal modeling and analyses of search behavior revealed a similarly pronounced gap between medical and monetary decisions in decisions for others as in decisions for oneself. Our results suggest that when making medical decisions, people try to avoid the worst outcome while neglecting its probability—even when the outcomes affect others rather than themselves.     

中医院市场定位的两难选择及其对策

中医院的市场定位处于两难选择之中:中医药技术的潜在优势与现实局限性的矛盾、中医院管理者的价值取向与现实窘况的矛盾、中医院发展历史沉淀与市场竞争的矛盾、政府的中医药政策自身存在的矛盾等。这些矛盾涉及多方行为和利益主体,必须深化改革,以实现中医院的良性发展。     

问题启动对跨时选择的影响研究

本研究采用2×3混合实验设计,通过控制时间距离和表征的建构水平,对不同问题启动下的跨时选择进行对比研究。实验结果显示,问题启动是影响跨时选择的重要因素,不同问题启动下的未来结果价值折扣存在显著差异。Why问题启动使个体的时间距离敏感度降低,How问题启动使个体的时间距离敏感度提高。     

时间贴现的分段性

以延迟和相对延迟时间贴现的实验范式, 用选择法、匹配法确定价值主观相等点, 探讨时间贴现的分段性。三个实验和一个问卷调查发现, 时间贴现具有分段性。被试的时间贴现有三次显著变化, 表现为三个时段时间贴现心理状态的不同: 从现在到未来2周内规避损失、偏好风险、愿意短期等待, 从未来2周起直到未来10年采取非补偿性策略、需求与风险并重、愿意长期等待, 和从未来10年起直到未来50年规避风险、聊胜于无、不愿意等待。     

心理距离对跨期选择和风险选择的影响

通过考察时间距离、社会距离和概率距离对跨期选择和风险选择的影响, 探究跨期选择和风险选择心理过程的相似性, 并检验不同心理距离影响决策的相似性。结果发现, 无论是时间距离(实验1)、社会距离(实验2)、还是概率距离(实验3), 心理距离越远, 被试在跨期选择中越倾向于延迟选项, 在风险选择中越倾向于风险选项。研究认为, 在跨期选择和风险选择中, 选项的表征结构和选项整体评价时不同选项特征的相对权重具有相似性。随着心理距离增加, 与高识解相联系的金额特征的相对权重增加, 与低识解相联系的时间和概率特征的相对权重降低, 这使得被试更倾向于选择金额较大的延迟和风险选项。同时, 研究发现三类心理距离对两类决策有相似影响, 进一步验证了不同心理距离的本质相似性。     

成瘾人群跨期选择的神经机制及干预方法

成瘾可分为物质成瘾和行为成瘾, 两类成瘾人群在跨期选择上都表现出高时间折扣率的缺陷, 但也有各自的特异性特征。成瘾人群跨期选择缺陷的神经基础主要集中在评估网络(腹内侧前额叶、纹状体、后扣带皮层等)、认知控制网络(前额叶皮层、前扣带皮层等)和预期想象网络(海马、杏仁核等); 可利用心理训练来改善成瘾人群跨期选择缺陷, 其干预方法包括工作记忆训练、预期想象训练、金钱管理指导等。未来研究应该从成瘾者跨期选择缺陷的认知机制、3个神经网络系统的交互作用机理、行为遗传学以及开发有效的干预方法等方面展开大量研究。     

Choices in Life: A Clinical Tool for Facilitating Midlife Review

A critical developmental task of midlife involves reviewing one's past as well as preparing for one's future. The ability to identify past choices, task responsibility for them, and utilize developing patterns in future decision making is seen as a critical component of continued adult development. The Choicemap offers a structured clinical tool to guide such a midlife review. Engaging in this process assists adults in developing choicemaking skills, and provides a powerful clinical intervention.