收益和损失情境中D-E冲突的反射效应和习得速度

心理与行为研究 ›› 2019, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (2): 268-273.

收益和损失情境中D-E冲突的反射效应和习得速度

侯钰莹¹, 陈世平¹, 孟四清²

1. 天津师范大学教育科学学院, 天津 300384;
2. 天津市教育科学学院德育与心理所, 天津 300091

收稿日期:2018-03-11 出版日期:2019-03-20 发布日期:2019-04-19
通讯作者: 陈世平,E-mail:chensp126@126.com

The Perception and Learning Speed on Description-experience Conflict under Gain and Loss Situations

HOU Yuying¹, CHEN Shiping¹, MENG Siqing²

1. College of Education Sicence, Tianjin Normal University, Tianjin 300384;
2. Moral Educational and Psychological department,Tianjin Academy of Educational Science, Tianjin 300191

Received:2018-03-11 Online:2019-03-20 Published:2019-04-19

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为考察了个体在收益和损失情境中对D-E冲突的感知和习得速度，实验采用Weiss-Cohen的D-E冲突范式。结果发现：（1）在D-E冲突条件下，个体在收益情境中更倾向于选择安全选项，在损失情境中更倾向于选择风险选项。（2）在收益和D-E冲突中当D>；E时的条件下，个体习得D-E冲突的速度快于在D-E冲突中当D<；E时的损失条件下个体习得D-E冲突的速度。研究表明在收益和损失情境下，个体表现出反射效应；不同条件下，个体对D-E冲突的习得速度不同。

关键词: D-E冲突, 收益损失情境, 风险决策

Abstract: In order to explore subjects' perception and learning speed on description-experience conflict under gain and loss situations, the experiment adopted Weiss-Cohen's paradigms of description-experience conflict. The results found that: 1) In description-experience conflict condition, subjects tend to choose safe options in gain situations, and risk options in loss situations. 2) In gain situation and description-experience conflict conditions, when D>E, subjects learned faster description-experience conflict than when D

Key words: description-experience conflict, gain and loss situation, risk decision

中图分类号:

B849

侯钰莹, 陈世平, 孟四清. 收益和损失情境中D-E冲突的反射效应和习得速度[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(2): 268-273.

HOU Yuying, CHEN Shiping, MENG Siqing. The Perception and Learning Speed on Description-experience Conflict under Gain and Loss Situations[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(2): 268-273.

参考文献

庄锦英. (2004). 情绪、边框影响决策认知过程的实验研究. 心理科学, 27(6), 1340-1343, doi:10.3969/j.issn.1671-6981.2004.06.016
Barron, G., & Erev, I. (2003). Small feedback-based decisions and their limited correspondence to description-based decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16(3), 215-233, doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0771.
Fantino, E., & Navarro, A. (2012). Description-experience gaps:Assessments in other choice paradigms. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25(3), 303-314, doi:10.1002/bdm.737.
Hau, R. B., Pleskac, T. J., & Hertwig, R. (2010). Decisions from experience and statistical probabilities:Why they trigger different choices than a priori probabilities. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23(1), 48-68, doi:10.1002/bdm.v23:1.
Hertwig, R., Barron, G., Weber, E. U., & Erev, I. (2004). Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice. Psychological Science, 15(8), 534-539, doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00715.x.
Hertwig, R., & Erev, I. (2009). The description-experience gap in risky choice. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(12), 517-523, doi:10.1016/j.tics.2009.09.004.
Lejarraga, T., & Gonzalez, C. (2011). Effects of feedback and complexity on repeated decisions from description. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 116(2), 286-295.
Ludvig, E. A., & Spetch, M. L. (2011). Of black swans and tossed coins:Is the description-experience gap in risky choice limited to rare events? PLoS One, 6(6), e20262, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020262.
Rosness, R. (2009). A contingency model of decision-making involving risk of accidental loss. Safety Science, 47(6), 807-812, doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2008.10.015.
Vlaev, I. (2011). Inconsistency in risk preferences:A psychophysical anomaly. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 304.
Wang, L., Zheng, J. H., Huang, S. W., & Sun, H. Y. (2015). P300 and decision making under risk and ambiguity. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2015, Article ID 108417.
Weiss-Cohen, L., Konstantinidis, E., Speekenbrink, M., & Harvey, N. (2016). Incorporating conflicting descriptions into decisions from experience. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 135, 55-69.

[1]	徐慧, 李美佳, 彭华茂. 眼睛注视线索对经济领域风险决策的影响：基于框架效应范式[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(1): 37-44.
[2]	廖雅慧, 韩梦霏. 决策任务类型与结果框架对风险决策的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(1): 45-51.
[3]	任亚萍, 孙岩, 赵雪松. 不同任务框架下自我损耗对自我-他人风险决策的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(6): 750-756.
[4]	王秀娟, 王梦婷, 韩尚锋, 刘燊, 张林. 风险决策框架下的求助意愿：依恋的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(6): 840-845.
[5]	刘耀中, 刘敏, 彭滨. 任务框架和社会距离对风险决策的影响：来自ERP的证据[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2018, 16(1): 13-21.
[6]	毛华配，廖传景，黄成毅，童辉杰. 动态决策模型下情绪对风险决策的影响^*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2014, 12(2): 244-248.
[7]	张玮, 成龙. 风险损益率模型:对展望理论的补充[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2013, 11(6): 806-812.
[8]	段锦云,王重鸣. 创业风险决策框架效应特征研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2010, 8(2): 106-112.
[9]	吴燕, 周晓林, 罗跃嘉. 跨期选择和风险决策的认知神经机制[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2010, 8(1): 76-80.