期刊文献+

行为决策中的比率偏差 被引量:2

Ratio Bias in Behavioral Decision
下载PDF
导出
摘要 比率偏差是指小概率事件以不同比率形式呈现时,人们倾向于认为以较小数字呈现的事件更不可能发生。这种现象在医疗卫生领域和职业生涯决策中有重要的应用价值。目前关于比率偏差产生的解释主要包括标准理论与认知经验自我理论。比率偏差的影响因素主要包括元认知技能、计算能力、认知视角和任务性质等。未来的研究需要从比率偏差现象的产生、心理机制及应用方面进行深入研究。 The Ratio bias occurs when people judge an unlikely event as less likely or more surprising when its probability is presented in the form of equivalent ratios of small than of larger numbers. This phenomenon is universal in people's daily decision-making, especially in managerial and medical decisions. The paper introduces two psychological mechanisms of the ratio bias, including norm theory and cognitive-experiential self-theory. We then discuss the factors that affect the ratio bias, including metacognitive skills, numeracy, cognitive perspective, and task characters, ect. We outline several issues that deserve further investigations.
出处 《心理科学进展》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2013年第5期886-892,共7页 Advances in Psychological Science
关键词 比率偏差 标准理论 认知经验自我理论 ratio bias norm theory cognitive-experiential self-theory
  • 相关文献

参考文献34

  • 1陈俊,贺晓玲,张积家.反事实思维两大理论:范例说和目标-指向说[J].心理科学进展,2007,15(3):416-422. 被引量:31
  • 2李斌,徐富明,马红宇,王伟.锚定效应对消费者决策的影响研究述评[J].消费经济,2011,27(5):94-96. 被引量:8
  • 3Alonso, D., & Fernandez-Berracal, P. (2003). Irrational decisions: Attending to numbers rather than ratios. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(7), 1537-1547.
  • 4Amsel, E., Close, J., Sadler, E., & Klaczynski, P. A. (2009). ColLege students' awareness of irrational judgments on gambling tasks: A dual-process account. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 143(3), 293-317.
  • 5Amsel, E., Klaczynski, P. A., Johnston, A., Bench, S., Close, J., Sadler, E Walker, R. (2008). A dual-process account of the development of scientific reasoning: the nature and development of metacognitive intercession skills. Cognitive Development, 23(4), 452-471.
  • 6Bonner, C., & Newell, B. R. (2008). How to make a risk seem riskier: The ratio bias versus construal /eve! theory. Judgment and Decision Making, 3(5), 411-416.
  • 7Bonner, C., & Newell, B. R. (2010). In conflict with ourselves? An investigation of heuristic and analytic processes in decision making. Memory & Cognition, 38(2), 186-196.
  • 8Dale, D., Rudski, J., Schwarz, A., & Smith, E. (2007). Innumeracy and incentives: A ratio bias experiment.Judgment and Decision Making, 2(4), 243-250.
  • 9Denes-Raj, V., & Epstein, S. (1994). Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: When people behave against their better judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5), 819-829.
  • 10Denes-Raj, V., Epstein, S., & Cole, J. (1995). The generality of the ratio-bias phenomenon. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(10), 1083-1092.

二级参考文献64

  • 1Epley N, Gilovich T. Putting adjustment back in the anchoring and adjustment heuristic: Differential processing of self - generated and experimenter-provided anchors [J]. Psychological Science, 2001, 12(5) : 391 - 396.
  • 2Strack F, Mussweiler T. Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect: Mechanisms of selective accessibility [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1997, 73(3): 437 - 446.
  • 3Wilson T D, Houston C E, Eitling K M, et al. A new look at anchoring effects: Basic anchoring and its antecedents [J]. Journal of Experimental psychology : General, 1996, 125 (4) : 387 - 402.
  • 4Jacowitz K E, Kahneman D. Measures of anchoring in estimation tasks [ J]. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1995, 21 (11): 1161 - 1166.
  • 5Epley N. A tale of tuned decks? Anchoring as accessibility and anchoting as adjustment [A]. In: D. J. Koehler, N. Harvey (Eds.). The Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making [C]. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 2004:240 - 256.
  • 6Simonson I, Drolet A. Anchoring effects on consumers' willingness - to - pay and willingness - to - accept [ J ]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2004, 13:681 - 690.
  • 7Ravi D, Simonson I. Making complementary choices in consumption episodes: Highlighting versus balancing [ J ]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1999, 2(36) : 29 - 44.
  • 8Jiang Y, Coulter R, Ratneshwar S. Consumption decisions involving goal tradeoffs: The impact of one choice on another [ J ]. Advances in Consumer Research, 2005, 32( 1 ): 206 - 211.
  • 9Nelson L D, Simmons J P. Favored favorites: Inequalitities in equivalent outcomes. In: Nelson L D. Special session summary ad- vance in the investigation and application of the anchoring and adjustment heuristic [J]. Advances in Consumer Research, 2005, 32 (1): 127 - 128.
  • 10Rajesh C, Dhruv G. Anchoring effects of advertised reference price and sale price: The moderating role of saving presentation format [ J]. Journal of Business Research, 2006, 59(10&11): 1063 - 1071.

共引文献37

同被引文献10

  • 1Alonso,D.,& Fernández-Berrocal,P.(2003).Irrational decisions:Attending to numbers rather than ratios.Personality and Individual Differences,35 (7),1537-1547.
  • 2Dale,D.,Rudski,J.,Schwarz,A.,& Smith,E.(2007).Innumeracy and incentives:A ratio bias experiment.Judgment and Decision Making,2 (4),243-250.
  • 3Denes-Raj,V.,& Epstein,S.(1994).Conflict between intuitive and rational processing:When people behave against their better judgment.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,66 (5),819-829.
  • 4Kahneman,D.,& Miller,D.T.(1986).Norm theory:Comparing reality to its alternatives.Psychological Review,93(2),136-153.
  • 5Miller,D.T.,Turnbull,W.,& McFarland,C.(1989).When a coincidence is suspicious:The role of mental simulation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,57 (4),581-589.
  • 6Pacini,R.,& Epstein,S.(1999).The interaction of three facets of concrete thinking in a game of chance.Thinking & Reasoning,5 (4),303-325.
  • 7Reyna,V.F.,& Brainerd,C.J.(2008).Numeracy,ratio bias,and denominator neglect in judgments of risk and probability.Learning and Individual Differences,18(1),89-107.
  • 8Yamagishi,K.(1997a).Upward versus downward anchoring in frequency judgments of social facts.Japanese Psychological Research,39 (2),124-129.
  • 9Yamagishi,K.(1997b).When a 12.86% mortality is more dangerous than 24.14%:Implications for risk communication.Applied Cognitive Psychology,11 (6),495-506.
  • 10李斌,徐富明,马红宇,王伟.锚定效应对消费者决策的影响研究述评[J].消费经济,2011,27(5):94-96. 被引量:8

引证文献2

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