Patterns of Preference for Numerical and Verbal Probabilities

We report results of an experiment designed to test a principle formulated by Budescu and Wallsten (1995), that, when communicating uncertainty information, mode choices are sensitive to sources and degrees of vagueness. In addition, we examined subjects’ efficacy in using such uncertainty information as a function of communication mode, source, and vagueness. In phase one of the experiment, subjects in a dyad used precise (numerical) or imprecise (verbal) expressions to communicate to a remote partner precise or vague uncertainty about the likelihoods of events. Spinner outcomes were used to generate precise uncertainty while answers to almanac questions were used to elicit vague uncertainty. In phase two, subjects saw the events paired with their partners’ estimates of similar events, and were asked to gamble on one event from each pair. Communication mode preferences were measured as the relative frequency that subjects chose the numerical mode to either express or receive uncertainty information regarding the events. Efficacy was measured as the relative frequency that subjects choose from the pair the event associated with the objectively more probable uncertainty expression. Underlying uncertainty interacted with direction of communication to affect preferences for modes of expression of the probabilities. Subjects preferred precise (numerical) information, especially for precise events (spinners). For vague events (questions), their preference for precise (numerical) information was stronger when receiving than when communicating information. Similar preferences were reflected in the efficiency of subsequent gamble decisions based on the probability estimates. Specifically, decisions were more efficacious (i.e. consistent with Expected Utility) when degrees of precision in events and estimates matched. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The use of multiple reference points in risky decision making

Among psychologists and economists, prospect theory continues to be one of the most popular models of decision making. The theory's key property is reference dependence; specifically, how an individual's perception of loss or gain is dependent upon their starting point (i.e., the status quo). Although prospect theory is widely accepted, other authors have sought the inclusion of reference points besides the status quo. Initially these extensions focused on the importance of single reference points such as goals. More recently, authors have explained choice data by including multiple reference points within the value function. Multiple‐reference‐point theories generally assume that many choice situations possess an implicit or explicit goal, or point an individual will strive to obtain, and/or a minimum requirement (i.e., a “lower bound”) above which an individual will strive to stay. In two experiments, we present evidence that individuals can utilize the minimum requirement, status quo, and goal within a single risky decision task. Participants most often chose to maximize their chance of reaching reference points even when that decision was riskier, resulted in lower expected value, resulted in lower expected utility, or ran contrary to the predictions of prospect theory. Furthermore, salience and uncertainty moderated the use of goals and minimum requirements as reference points. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Individual Differences in the Predictions of Behavioral Intentions

Abstract

We examined individual differences in the formation of behavioral intentions by American female students. Within the frameworks of the Fishbein-Ajzen and Triandis models of behavioral intentions, we measured the relative emphasis given to intention predictors for 40 behavioral intentions and examined how this emphasis was related to authoritarianism. In addition, empirical evidence was sought for the conceptual distinction between a personal norm (internalized norm) and a subjective norm (perceptions of significant other' opinions concerning a given action). Relative to low authoritarians, high authoritarians took subjective norms less into account, placed greater emphasis on personal norms, and emphasized less the consequences of action in forming behavioral intentions. The results suggest that subjective and personal norms can be distinguished empirically.     

突发事件中民众责任归因的心理需求与应对

突发事件发生后,通过责任归因对事件原因和责任归属进行推断是民众心理活动的重要特征之一。从民众心理需要来看,突发事件带来的不确定感驱使个体寻找事件的解释来实现认知闭合,控制感的不足则会让个体更加强调外部世界的秩序性,这两种需要也是事件中阴谋论传播和替罪羊效应的心理基础。相应地,在事件中负有责任的组织主体,也应当基于民众的心理需要采取适当的应对策略,来重塑组织形象和民众的信任,避免责任规避带来的负面效应。未来研究可以进一步从心理学视角补充整合性的实证证据,对突发事件的不同类型进行区分,关注责任归因与其他社会心理学变量之间的联系,以及探索适合中国社会的有效应对措施。     

不确定是坏的么?不确定状态中的错误加工特点及其解释机制

错误是人类决策和行为过程中在所难免的。然而, 错误常常带来不利后果甚至危及生命(如高危作业时的失误)。如何有效监控错误并优化行为对于个体生存和发展至关重要。错误的发生受到内部心理状态影响, 个体常在不确定的情境中做出判断, 不确定状态增强还是削弱错误监控, 是一个重要科学问题, 却存在矛盾结果。在前期积累和理论分析基础上, 本项目拟从人格差异角度探索不确定容忍度的调节作用。不确定容忍度的差异意味着个体对于模糊情境的耐受性和错误的敏感性不同, 因而可能调节不确定状态中的错误加工过程。研究1采用行为实验, 揭示多种不确定情境中(如奖赏/惩罚)错误监控和错误后调整的认知特点, 考察不确定容忍度的调节作用; 研究2通过考察电生理表征、时间加工进程和神经振荡机制等进一步解释这些现象。本项目对于探明不确定状态中的错误加工规律及其人格调节机制具有重要理论价值, 对于促进个体的环境适应、目标达成等具有较好现实意义。     

影响视觉复合刺激中整体和局部性质加工的几种因素

文章研究了视知觉组织,空间位置不确定性和视野位置等因素对复合刺激中整体和局部性质加工的影响。实验发现,（１）当复合刺激呈现在白背景上时,反应时和干扰作用都表明复复合刺激中大图的加工优于小图,刺激位置的不确定削弱大图对小图的干扰作用;而当复合刺激呈现在由“＋”组成的背影或时,小图的加工优于大图,刺激位置的不确定延长分辩小图的ＲＴ;（２）与周国刺激相比,分辨视野中央的复合刺激的ＲＴ较短,这种影响对分辨     

不确定性、情绪对公正判断的影响

本研究以不确定管理模型为理论来源,采用实验法探讨了公正判断中的情绪效应。实验1采用2（两种情绪状态：愉快/愤怒）×4（四种结果：比自己多/一样多/比自己少/不知道）被试间设计。实验2采用2（两种情绪状态：愉快/愤怒）×3（三种程序：有发言权/外显无发言权/无发言权信息）被试间设计。分别考察了分配公正与程序公正判断中的情绪影响。结果发现：不确定性调节了情绪与公平判断之间的关系。当用于公平判断的外部信息不明确时,情绪充当了公平判断的线索。     

表情对婴儿面孔图式效应的调节及其机制

婴儿面孔图式效应是促进早期亲子关系形成的一种先天本能反应, 该效应一直被认为主要是受婴儿面孔结构的影响。但近年来表情对该效应的影响开始得到关注, 在以成人面孔为基线的条件下, 婴儿面孔图式效应量会因表情不同而有所变化, 表现出中性婴儿面孔图式效应最强的现象。鉴于目前对该现象的成因及其神经机制知之甚少, 所以本项目拟先建立一套婴儿与成人同面孔多表情图片系统; 然后以此为基础, 分别考察面孔表情不确定性是否会调节成人对不同表情婴儿面孔的偏好和注意偏向, 并探究其相应神经机制, 促进养育脑研究在我国的开展。     

Qualities of reflection: using Saul’s (2001) On Equilibrium to restore humanity to reflection in healthcare

Reflection features strongly in health and care work as a tool for personal and professional development and can support us as practitioners to be critical and self-aware in practice, of practice and the impact on clients and patients. Its power to transform learning and practice, however, has been watered down through recipe-following in reflective recording and through the avoidance of recording uncertainty or practice that might not measure against professional codes. Drawing on the humanist philosophy of John Ralston Saul, I suggest using Saul’s ‘six qualities’ as themes for reflective questions. I reflect on the influence of reason through codes of practice and offer suggestions for questions to restore an awareness of Self in work with clients and patients. Finally, from my experience as a counselling student and healthcare educator, I argue that we should have a greater appreciation of the power of uncertainty in reflective recording.     

Autistic Heterogeneity: Linking Uncertainties and Indeterminacies

Autism is a highly uncertain entity and little is said about it with any degree of certainty. Scientists must, and do, work through these uncertainties in the course of their work. Scientists explain uncertainty in autism research through discussion of epistemological uncertainties which suggest that diverse methods and techniques make results hard to reconcile, ontological uncertainties which suggest doubt over taxonomic coherence, but also through reference to autism’s indeterminacy which suggests that the condition is inherently heterogeneous. Indeed, indeterminacy takes two forms—an inter-personal form which suggests that there are fundamental differences between individuals with autism and an intra-personal form which suggests that no one factor is able to explain all features of autism within a given individual. What is apparent in the case of autism is that scientists put uncertainty and indeterminacy into discussion with one another and, rather than a well-policed epistemic-ontic boundary, there is a movement between, and an entwinement of, the two. Understanding scientists’ dialogue concerning uncertainty and indeterminacy is of importance for understanding autism and autistic heterogeneity but also for understanding uncertainty and ‘uncertainty work’ within science more generally.