期刊文献+

认知需要和警告类型对合取谬误的影响 被引量:2

The Effect of Need for Cognition and Warning Type on Conjunction Fallacy
下载PDF
导出
摘要 合取谬误是一种常见的判断偏差,它指的是在不确定条件下,个体评估合取事件及其简单事件发生的概率时,对合取规则系统性偏离的一种现象。实验1就认知需要类型对合取谬误的影响进行探讨,结果发现高认知需要的被试较不易表现出双重合取谬误和单合取谬误。实验2探讨了警告类型对合取谬误的影响,结果发现无警告时个体最易表现出单合取谬误,其次是间接警告,最后是直接警告;此外,认知需要与警告类型的交互作用显著,高认知需要的被试在直接警告和间接警告时更少表现出双重合取谬误,在直接警告时更少表现出单合取谬误。 As a common judgment bias, the conjunction fallacy refers to a phenomenon that individual' s assessment of conjunctive event and simple event under uncer- tainty systemically deviates the conjunctive rules. Al- though the conjunction fallacy is a well -documen- ted psychological phenomenon in behavioral decision making, existing literature has been limited to its in- fluence factors. In the present study, three experi- ments are conducted to test whether and how the need for cognition ( NC, high NC or low NC) and the warning (no warning or direct warning or indirect warning) affect the conjunction fallacy. Experiment 1 explores the effect of different NC on the conjunction fallacy and finds that subjects with high NC are re- luctant to the dual conjunction fallacy and the single conjunction fallacy. Experiment 2 suggests warning interacts with NC and influences the conjunction fal- lacy, and subjects are most likely to demonstrate the single conjunction fallacy when there is no warning. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.
出处 《应用心理学》 CSSCI 2013年第3期205-211,共7页 Chinese Journal of Applied Psychology
关键词 合取谬误 认知需要 警告类型 conjunction fallacy, need for cog- nition, warning type
  • 相关文献

参考文献13

  • 1邝怡,施俊琦,蔡雅琦,王垒.大学生认知需求量表的修订[J].中国心理卫生杂志,2005,19(1):57-60. 被引量:50
  • 2纪林芹,张文新.攻击性儿童的P300事件相关电位研究[J].心理科学,2008,31(2):299-303. 被引量:17
  • 3刘立秋,陆勇.Linda问题:“齐当别”抉择模型的解释[J].心理科学进展,2007,15(5):735-742. 被引量:7
  • 4Bailey,J. (1997). The need for cognition and re- sponse mode in the active construction of an infor- mation domain. Journal of Economic Psychology, 18,69 - 85.
  • 5Cheng,F. ,& Wu,C. (2010). Debiasing the framing effect:The effect of warning and involvement. De- cision Support Systems ,23, 328 - 334.
  • 6Fisk, J. E. , & Pidgeon, N. (1996). Component prob- abilities and the conjunction fallacy: Resolving signed summation and the low component model in a contingent approach. Acta Psychologica,94,1 - 20.
  • 7Leippe, M. R. , Eisenstadt, D. , Rauch, S. M, & Seib, H. M. (2004). Timing of eyewitness expert testi- mony ,jurors need for cognition, and case strength as determinants of trial verdicts. Journal of Applied Psychology. 89,524 - 541.
  • 8Oechssler, J., Roider, A., & Schrnitz, P. W. (2009). Cognitive abilities and behavioral biases. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 72, 147 - 152.
  • 9Petty,R. ,& Caeioppo,J. (1982). The need for cog- nition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-ogy,42(1),116 - 131.
  • 10Shiloh, S. , Salton, E. , & Sharabi, D. (2002). Indi- vidual differences in rational and intuitive thinking styles as predictors of heuristic responses and framing effects. Personality and Individual Differ- ences,32( 3 ) ,415 - 429.

二级参考文献19

  • 1李纾.艾勒悖论(Allais Paradox)另释[J].心理学报,2001,33(2):176-181. 被引量:17
  • 2李纾.确定、不确定及风险状态下选择反转:“齐当别”选择方式的解释(英文)[J].心理学报,2005,37(4):427-433. 被引量:24
  • 3李纾.发展中的行为决策研究[J].心理科学进展,2006,14(4):490-496. 被引量:39
  • 4安妮·安娜斯塔西 苏珊娜·厄比纳.心理测验[M].杭州:浙江教育出版社,1998.159-160.
  • 5Cacioppo JT, Petty RE, Kao CF.The Efficient Assessment of Need for Cognition Journal of Personality Assessment 1984, 48 (3): 306-307.
  • 6Cacioppo JT, Petty RE.The Need For Cognition Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1982, 42 (1):116-131.
  • 7Koch C, Hayworth E.Examining the Relationship Between Need for Cognition and the Muller-Lyer Illusion North American Journal of Psychology, 2003, 5 (2): 249-256.
  • 8Gulgoz S. Need for Cognition and Cognitive Performance From a Cross-Cultural Perspective: Examples of Academic Success and Solving Anagrams The Journal of Psychology, 2001, 135(1): 100-112.
  • 9Cacioppo Jr, Petty RE, Feinstein .IA, et al. Dispositional Differences in Cognitive Motivation: The Life and Times of Individuals Varying in Need for Cognition Psychological Bulletin, 1996, 119 (2): 197-253.
  • 10Areni CS, Ferrell ME,Wilcox JB. The Persuasive Impact of Reported Group Opinions on Individuals Low vs High in Need for Cognition: Rationalization vs Biased Elaboration? Psychology & Marketing, 2000, 17 (10): 855-862.

共引文献70

同被引文献14

引证文献2

二级引证文献3

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