社会距离及框架效应对安于现状偏差影响的实验研究

发布时间：2018-05-07 18:29

本文选题：安于现状偏差 + 外源的安于现状偏差　；参考：《济南大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：安于现状偏差作为一种决策偏差，，指的是决策者即使面临更好的选择依然会坚持以往选择的一种现象，它常常导致人们的决策偏离理性，为使人们采取有效措施达到合理决策，对其影响因素的研究十分必要。目前，国内对安于现状偏差的研究还很匮乏，并且以往研究几乎都是综述性研究，缺乏实证性研究。总结国外以往的文献资料发现，以往对安于现状偏差研究时所用的实验材料中的“现状选项”均是由实验材料所事先设置的，这说明被试维持的是他人之前的选择或者由外部环境造成的默认选项，考察的均属于外源的安于现状偏差。然而，在日常生活中，我们更常面临的是在个人决策时坚持自己之前的选择，为了使决策情境更贴近现实生活，在实验二中设计两次选择的决策情境，考察被试内源的安于现状偏差，从而拓展了以往安于现状偏差的研究领域。另外，之前的研究仅在自我决策的情况下得到了验证，没有研究涉及为他人决策的情境，且框架效应对安于现状偏差的影响有待研究，故本研究将“社会距离”和“框架效应”作为两个自变量引入本实验，以探讨它们对内源的安于现状和外源的安于现状偏差的影响。在实验一中，我们探讨了社会距离和框架效应对外源的安于现状偏差的影响。实验结果表明自我决策时存在外源的安于现状偏差，而为他人决策时不存在明显的外源的安于现状偏差。社会距离对外源的安于现状有影响，具体表现为自我决策时比为他人决策时被试更倾向维持他人之前的选择或者由外部环境造成的默认选项。在实验二中，我们探讨了社会距离和框架效应对内源的安于现状偏差的影响。实验结果表明损失框架下存在内源的安于现状偏差，而收益框架下不存在明显的内源的安于现状偏差。框架效应对内源的安于现状有影响，即损失框架下比收益框架下被试更倾向维持自己之前的选择。最后，本实验的结果为决策者采取更理性的决策行为提供了几个实质性的应对策略，例如，在决策时我们应该多听取他人的建议避免独自决策以减少安于现状偏差的发生，正如我们所说的“旁观者清”，倾听他人的意见有时的确能使决策变得更加理性。另外，悲观主义者更倾向坚持之前的选择而不愿意做出改变，因为它们的注意力经常集中在消极的事情上。同时，乐观主义者更可能积极的改变现状而做出更理性的决策。这提醒我们在决策时应采取更为积极的态度。
[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.
【学位授予单位】：济南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：B842

【参考文献】