期刊文献+

群体极化、不对称优势效应及风险概率对风险偏好的影响

Effects of the Group Polarization,the Asymmetric dominance effect and the Risky Probabilities on Risk Preferences
下载PDF
导出
摘要 两个实验考察了金钱和生命决策中群体极化、不对称优势效应及风险概率对风险偏好的影响。结果发现:(1)在金钱决策中,与个体决策相比,群体决策更加倾向于冒险;在增加诱导选项后,被试倾向于风险选择;在风险概率增加时,被试也倾向于风险选择;(2)在生命决策中,增加诱导选项和风险概率都会使被试倾向于风险选择,另外,个体/群体决策和风险概率、不对称优势效应和风险概率的交互作用显著。 Two experiments involving money decision and life decision were made to explore the effects of the group polarization,the asymmetric dominance effect and the risky probabilities on risk preferences.The results indicated that:(1) In money decision,groups were more daring than individuals;There were higher risk preferences in making decisions when adding a decoy option or increasing risky probabilities;(2) In life decision,risk preferences were influenced by asymmetric dominance effect and risky probabilities;Interaction effects between members of decision and risky probabilities,between asymmetric dominance effect and risky probabilities were found in life decision.
出处 《社会心理科学》 2011年第11期162-165,178,共5页 Science of Social Psychology
基金 山东省软科学基金项目(编号:2010RKGA1064)资助
关键词 风险偏好 群体极化 不对称优势效应 风险概率 risk preferences group polarization asymmetric dominance effect risky probabilities
  • 相关文献

参考文献14

  • 1刘永芳,陈雪娜,卢光莉,王怀勇.决策者角色及相关因素对风险偏好的影响[J].心理科学,2010,33(3):548-551. 被引量:26
  • 2熊远来.风险态度、概率结构对偏好反转的影响[D]浙江大学,浙江大学2006.
  • 3Kaisa Herne.The Effects of Decoy Gambles on Individual Choice[J]. Experimental Economics . 1999 (1)
  • 4Lichtenstein S,Slovic P.R esponse-induced reversals of preference in gambling:an extended replication in Las Vegas. Ori Research Bulletin . 1972
  • 5Moscovici S,Zavalloni M.The group as a polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality . 1969
  • 6Bonaccio S,R eeve C L.Consideration of preference shifts due to relative attribute variability. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes . 2006
  • 7Myers D,Lamm H.The Group Polarization Phenomenon. Psychogical Bulletin . 1976
  • 8Myers,D. G.,Kaplan,M. F.Group-induced polarization in simulated juries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin . 1976
  • 9Hsee C K,Weber E U.A fundamental prediction error: Self-others discrepancies in risk preference. Journal of Experimental Psychology General . 1997
  • 10Markus HR,Kitayama S.Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review . 1991

二级参考文献9

  • 1Lichtenstein S, Slovic P. Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Proceedings of the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 1968, 3:59-60.
  • 2Lichtenstein S, Slovic P. Reversals of Preference between Bids and Choice in Gambling Decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971, 89: 46- 55.
  • 3Lindman H R. Inconsistent preference among gambles. Journal of experimental psychology, 1971, 89. 390 - 97.
  • 4Grether D M, Plott C R. Economic theory of choice and the preference reversal phenomenon. American Economic Review, 1979, 69. 23-38.
  • 5Reilly R J. Preference reversal: further evidence and some suggested modifications in experimental design. American Economic Review, 1982, 72 . 576 - 84.
  • 6I/see C K, Weber E U. A Fundamental Prediction Error: Self- Others Discrepancies in Risk Preference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1997, 12(1) : 45 - 53.
  • 7Kahneman D, Tversky A. Prospect theory. Econometrica, 1979, 47:263- 292.
  • 8Osuna E E. The psychological cost of waiting. Journal fo mathematical psychology, 1985, 29: 82-105.
  • 9张玲.偏好反转研究述评[J].心理科学,1999,22(6):545-548. 被引量:7

共引文献25

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部