本文選題：安于現(xiàn)狀偏差 + 外源的安于現(xiàn)狀偏差��； 參考：《濟(jì)南大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：安于現(xiàn)狀偏差作為一種決策偏差，，指的是決策者即使面臨更好的選擇依然會(huì)堅(jiān)持以往選擇的一種現(xiàn)象，它常常導(dǎo)致人們的決策偏離理性，為使人們采取有效措施達(dá)到合理決策，對(duì)其影響因素的研究十分必要。目前，國(guó)內(nèi)對(duì)安于現(xiàn)狀偏差的研究還很匱乏，并且以往研究幾乎都是綜述性研究，缺乏實(shí)證性研究。總結(jié)國(guó)外以往的文獻(xiàn)資料發(fā)現(xiàn)，以往對(duì)安于現(xiàn)狀偏差研究時(shí)所用的實(shí)驗(yàn)材料中的“現(xiàn)狀選項(xiàng)”均是由實(shí)驗(yàn)材料所事先設(shè)置的，這說(shuō)明被試維持的是他人之前的選擇或者由外部環(huán)境造成的默認(rèn)選項(xiàng)，考察的均屬于外源的安于現(xiàn)狀偏差。然而，在日常生活中，我們更常面臨的是在個(gè)人決策時(shí)堅(jiān)持自己之前的選擇，為了使決策情境更貼近現(xiàn)實(shí)生活，在實(shí)驗(yàn)二中設(shè)計(jì)兩次選擇的決策情境，考察被試內(nèi)源的安于現(xiàn)狀偏差，從而拓展了以往安于現(xiàn)狀偏差的研究領(lǐng)域。另外，之前的研究?jī)H在自我決策的情況下得到了驗(yàn)證，沒(méi)有研究涉及為他人決策的情境，且框架效應(yīng)對(duì)安于現(xiàn)狀偏差的影響有待研究，故本研究將“社會(huì)距離”和“框架效應(yīng)”作為兩個(gè)自變量引入本實(shí)驗(yàn)，以探討它們對(duì)內(nèi)源的安于現(xiàn)狀和外源的安于現(xiàn)狀偏差的影響。 在實(shí)驗(yàn)一中，我們探討了社會(huì)距離和框架效應(yīng)對(duì)外源的安于現(xiàn)狀偏差的影響。實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果表明自我決策時(shí)存在外源的安于現(xiàn)狀偏差，而為他人決策時(shí)不存在明顯的外源的安于現(xiàn)狀偏差。社會(huì)距離對(duì)外源的安于現(xiàn)狀有影響，具體表現(xiàn)為自我決策時(shí)比為他人決策時(shí)被試更傾向維持他人之前的選擇或者由外部環(huán)境造成的默認(rèn)選項(xiàng)。 在實(shí)驗(yàn)二中，我們探討了社會(huì)距離和框架效應(yīng)對(duì)內(nèi)源的安于現(xiàn)狀偏差的影響。實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果表明損失框架下存在內(nèi)源的安于現(xiàn)狀偏差，而收益框架下不存在明顯的內(nèi)源的安于現(xiàn)狀偏差�？蚣苄�(yīng)對(duì)內(nèi)源的安于現(xiàn)狀有影響，即損失框架下比收益框架下被試更傾向維持自己之前的選擇。 最后，本實(shí)驗(yàn)的結(jié)果為決策者采取更理性的決策行為提供了幾個(gè)實(shí)質(zhì)性的應(yīng)對(duì)策略，例如，在決策時(shí)我們應(yīng)該多聽(tīng)取他人的建議避免獨(dú)自決策以減少安于現(xiàn)狀偏差的發(fā)生，正如我們所說(shuō)的“旁觀者清”，傾聽(tīng)他人的意見(jiàn)有時(shí)的確能使決策變得更加理性。另外，悲觀主義者更傾向堅(jiān)持之前的選擇而不愿意做出改變，因?yàn)樗鼈兊淖⒁饬?jīng)常集中在消極的事情上。同時(shí)，樂(lè)觀主義者更可能積極的改變現(xiàn)狀而做出更理性的決策。這提醒我們?cè)跊Q策時(shí)應(yīng)采取更為積極的態(tài)度。
[Abstract]:As a kind of decision deviation, complacency deviation refers to a phenomenon that decision-makers will stick to their previous choices even in the face of better choices. It often leads to people's decision deviating from reason, in order to make people take effective measures to reach reasonable decision. It is necessary to study the influencing factors. At present, the domestic research on complacency deviation is still very scarce, and the previous studies are almost summary research, lack of empirical research. After summarizing the previous literatures abroad, it is found that the "status options" in the experimental materials used in the previous researches on deviations from the current situation are all set up in advance by the experimental materials. This indicates that the subjects maintain the previous choices of others or the default options caused by the external environment. However, in our daily lives, what we are faced with more often is to stick to our previous choices when we make personal decisions. In order to make the decision situations closer to real life, we design two choices in experiment two. The internal sources of the subjects are satisfied with the status quo deviation, thus expanding the previous research field of the status quo deviation. In addition, previous studies have been validated only in the case of self-decision-making, and no research has been done on the situation in which decisions are made for others, and the impact of frame effects on complacency bias needs to be studied. In this study, "social distance" and "frame effect" were introduced as two independent variables to investigate their effects on endogenous complacency and exogenous complacency bias. In experiment 1, we investigated the effects of social distance and frame effect on the external deviations from the current situation. The experimental results show that there are external deviations from the status quo in self-decision-making, but there is no obvious external deviations in the decision-making for others. Social distance has an effect on the external content of the present situation, which shows that the subjects are more inclined to maintain the previous choices of others or the default options caused by the external environment than the subjects who make decisions for others. In the second experiment, we investigated the influence of social distance and frame effect on the endogenetic complacency deviation. The experimental results show that there is an endogenous complacency deviation under the loss framework, but no obvious endogenous satisfaction deviation under the income framework. The frame effect has an effect on endogenous satisfaction, that is, the loss framework is more likely to maintain their previous choices than those under the income framework. Finally, the results of this experiment provide several substantive coping strategies for decision makers to adopt more rational decision-making behavior. For example, we should listen to the advice of others and avoid making decisions alone in order to reduce the occurrence of complacent deviations. As we call it, listening to others can sometimes make decisions more rational. In addition, pessimists tend to stick to previous choices rather than make changes because they often focus on negative things. At the same time, optimists are more likely to actively change the status quo and make more rational decisions. This reminds us that we should take a more positive attitude in decision-making.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：濟(jì)南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：B842

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 吳明證;;內(nèi)隱聯(lián)結(jié)測(cè)驗(yàn)的IAT效應(yīng)和概念聯(lián)系的對(duì)應(yīng)關(guān)系研究[J];心理科學(xué);2006年03期

2 張文慧;王曉田;;自我框架、風(fēng)險(xiǎn)認(rèn)知和風(fēng)險(xiǎn)選擇[J];心理學(xué)報(bào);2008年06期

3 劉永芳;畢玉芳;王懷勇;;情緒和任務(wù)框架對(duì)自我和預(yù)期他人決策時(shí)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)偏好的影響[J];心理學(xué)報(bào);2010年03期

4 段婧;劉永芳;何琪;;決策者角色及相關(guān)變量對(duì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)偏好的影響[J];心理學(xué)報(bào);2012年03期

5 徐驚蟄;謝曉非;;決策過(guò)程中的建議采納[J];心理科學(xué)進(jìn)展;2009年05期

6 劉騰飛;徐富明;張軍偉;蔣多;陳雪玲;;安于現(xiàn)狀偏差的心理機(jī)制、影響因素及應(yīng)用啟示[J];心理科學(xué)進(jìn)展;2010年10期

7 孫彥;;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)條件下的跨期選擇[J];心理科學(xué)進(jìn)展;2011年01期

8 何貴兵,梁社紅,劉劍;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)偏好預(yù)測(cè)中的性別差異和框架效應(yīng)[J];應(yīng)用心理學(xué);2002年04期

9 莊錦英;關(guān)于成本沉沒(méi)效應(yīng)的實(shí)驗(yàn)研究[J];應(yīng)用心理學(xué);2005年01期

10 馬文娟;索濤;李亞丹;羅笠銖;馮廷勇;李紅;;得失框架效應(yīng)的分離——來(lái)自收益與損失型跨期選擇的研究[J];心理學(xué)報(bào);2012年08期

本文編號(hào)：1857999