不同类型事件中反事实思维对行为意向的影响

发布时间：2018-06-19 18:21

本文选题：反事实思维 + 行为意向　；参考：《西南大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：反事实思维是指对现实在心理上的替代性模拟,即把已经出现的结果和原本可能但实际未出现的结果进行对比,个体对过去事件加以心理否定并构建出一种假设可能的思维活动。反事实按照不同的分类方式,可分为上行、下行反事实思维;加法、减法、替代式反事实思维;或然、可然、应然反事实思维。反事实思维具有两种功能:情绪功能和准备功能。行为意向是人们给自己以某个特定的方式行动的指示。反事实思维通过促进行为意向,进而促进行为的改变是内容相关通路,通过这个通路改变行为包括以下三步:(1)问题引发反事实思维,(2)反事实思维引发行为意向,(3)行为意向引发相应的行为。在内容相关通路中,对于行为的调节来说,上行比较比下行比较更有用,在上行比较中,更关注于新的行动和新的策略。加法式反事实思维通常包含了更多的创造性,包含了对于新的选择更多的考虑,减法式反事实思维受限于已发生的事实。事件类型包括日常生活事件和重大生活事件两类。消极事件比积极事件更容易引发反事实思维,且上行反事实思维更为个体提供准备性功能,即负性生活事件与行为意向的联系更紧密,因此本文的研究对象主要为负性生活事件。目前国内外对反事实思维对行为意向的影响的研究主要集中在日常负性生活事件,对于重大负性生活事件的研究极少。反事实思维内容包括抽象和具体两种,研究发现改变事件的描述会影响反事实思维,与抽象的描述相比,具体的描述能够引发更多的上行反事实思维。反事实思维与行为意向的关系也会受到反事实思维内容的影响,有研究采用两种不同类型的内容信息,根据认知层次的变化,一类是特定的/具体的行为,一类抽象的行为,结果发现对于日常生活事件,相比于更概括化的反事实思维,当其中包含了怎样能够避免消极结果的更具体的信息时,更可能促进行为意向的判断。本研究采用顺序启动范式,研究不同类型事件中反事实思维对行为意向的影响,探讨反事实思维内容是否会影响这个过程。重点关注以下两个问题:(1)实验一主要探讨对于日常生活事件和重大生活事件,反事实思维是否都能促进行为意向;(2)实验二主要探讨反事实思维内容(具体/抽象)是否会影响反事实思维与行为意向的关系,以及在不同类型的事件中是否会有不同的影响。预实验证明个体更多的自发产生上行加法式反事实思维,且对以后行为均具有较为积极的影响。也为后续实验选出了日常生活事件和重大生活事件各十个。实验一是2(事件类型:日常生活事件/重大生活事件)×2(启动:反事实思维/经验思维)混合实验设计,事件类型为被试内变量,反事实思维/经验思维为被试间变量。结果发现事件类型主效应不显著,启动(反事实思维/经验思维)主效应显著,事件类型和启动交互作用不显著,说明在日常生活事件和重大生活事件条件下,反事实思维均能促进对行为意向的判断,且在两种事件类型下无显著差异。为了更进一步研究反事实思维内容对不同类型的事件的反事实思维对行为意向的影响进行了研究二。实验二是2(日常生活事件/重大生活事件)×2(启动:反事实思维/经验思维)×2(反事实思维内容:具体/抽象)被试内设计。研究假设为对于日常生活事件,当反事实思维内容是具体的时候,与经验思维相比,反事实思维能够促进行为意向;当反事实思维内容是抽象的时候,与经验思维相比,反事实思维不能够促进行为意向。对于重大生活事件,不管反事实思维内容是具体还是抽象,与经验思维相比,反事实思维都能够促进行为意向。重复测量方差分析结果表明事件类型主效应不显著,启动(反事实思维/经验思维)主效应显著,反事实思维内容主效应显著,事件类型和启动的交互作用不显著,事件类型和反事实思维内容的交互作用不显著,启动和反事实思维内容的交互作用显著,进一步做简单效应分析发现在具体的反事实思维内容条件下,反事实和经验组的差异显著,在抽象的反事实思维内容条件下,反事实和经验组的差异不显著,事件类型、启动和反事实思维内容的交互作用不显著。综上所述,得出如下结论:(1)对于日常生活事件和重大生活事件,反事实思维相对于经验思维都能够促进行为意向的判断,且促进效应没有显著差异。(2)对于日常生活事件和重大生活事件,当反事实思维内容是具体的时候,与经验思维相比,反事实思维能够促进行为意向;当反事实思维内容是抽象的时候,与经验思维相比,反事实思维不能够促进行为意向。
[Abstract]:Anti factual thinking refers to the psychological alternative simulation of reality, that is, comparing the results that have appeared and the original but not the actual results. The individual has a psychological negation of the past events and a hypothetical thinking activity. The anti fact can be divided into the upper line and the reverse fact thinking according to the different classification methods. Dimension; addition, subtraction, and alternative anti factual thinking; or, however, it should be anti factual thinking. Anti factual thinking has two functions: emotional function and preparation function. Behavioral intention is a directive for people to act in a particular way. The change of behavior through this path includes the following three steps: (1) the problem triggers anti factual thinking, (2) anti factual thinking triggers behavioral intentions, and (3) behavioral intentions lead to corresponding behavior. In the content related pathway, the upper line is more useful than the downlink in the regulation of behavior, and in the upper comparison, more attention is paid to new actions and new ones. Strategy. Additive anti factual thinking usually contains more creativity, including more consideration for new choices, subtractive anti factual thinking is limited to the facts that have occurred. The type of event includes two types of daily life events and major life events. Negative events are more likely to cause anti factual thinking than positive events, and the upside of negative events. Real thinking provides more preparatory function for individuals, that is, negative life events and behavioral intentions are more closely linked. Therefore, the main object of this study is negative life events. At present, the research on the effect of anti factual thinking on behavioral intention is mainly focused on the daily negative life events and the study of major negative life events. The content of anti factual thinking includes two kinds of abstract and concrete. The study finds that the description of changing events will affect the anti factual thinking. Compared with the abstract description, the specific description can lead to more uplink anti factual thinking. The relationship between anti factual thinking and behavioral intention will also be influenced by the content of anti factual thinking, and two studies use it. Different types of content information, according to the changes in the cognitive level, a class of specific / specific behavior, a class of abstract behavior, and the results are found to be more likely to promote behavioral intentions when compared to more general anti factual thinking, when it contains more specific information about how to avoid negative results. This study uses the sequential starting paradigm to study the effect of anti factual thinking on behavioral intentions in different types of events and to explore whether the content of anti factual thinking affects the process. The following two questions are focused on: (1) the experiment is mainly about whether the anti factual thinking can be promoted in the daily life events and the heavy life events. (2) experiment two mainly discusses whether the content of anti factual thinking (specific / Abstract) will affect the relationship between anti factual thinking and behavioral intention, and whether there will be different effects in different types of events. The pre experiment proves that the individual more spontaneous produce upside addition anti factual thinking and is more active in future behavior. We also selected ten daily life events and ten major life events for the follow-up experiment. The experiment one is 2 (event type: daily life event / major life event) x 2 (start: anti fact thinking / experiential thinking) mixed experiment design, the event type is the subject variable, the anti fact thinking / experiential thinking is the subject variable. The result is the result. The main effect of the current event type is not significant. The main effect of starting (anti factual thinking / experiential thinking) is significant, and the event type and the initiation interaction are not significant. It shows that in the daily life events and the major life events, the anti factual thinking can promote the judgment of the behavior intention, and there is no significant difference under the two types of events. Study the effect of anti factual thinking on anti factual thinking of different types of events. Two. Experiment two is 2 (daily life event / major life event) x 2 (start: anti factual thinking / experiential thinking) x 2 (anti fact thinking content: concrete / Abstract) in trial design. Research hypothesis is for daily life. When the content of anti factual thinking is specific, anti factual thinking can promote behavioral intention compared with experiential thinking. When anti factual thinking is abstract, anti factual thinking can not promote behavioral intention compared with experiential thinking. For major life events, the content of anti factual thinking is specific or abstract, and it is also abstract. The result of repeated measurement of variance analysis shows that the main effect of the event type is not significant, the main effect of the start (anti factual thinking / experiential thinking) is significant, the main effect of the anti factual thinking content is significant, the interaction between the event type and the start is not significant, the event type and the content of the anti factual thinking are not significant. The interaction is not significant, and the interaction between start and anti factual thinking is significant. Further analysis of simple effect finds that the difference between anti factual and empirical groups is significant under the specific anti factual thinking content conditions. Under the abstract anti factual thinking content, the difference between the anti fact and the experience group is not significant, the type of event, the start and the start of the fact. The interaction of anti factual thinking is not significant. To sum up, the following conclusions are drawn: (1) for daily life events and major life events, anti factual thinking and experiential thinking can promote the judgment of behavioral intention, and there is no significant difference in promoting effect. (2) anti factual thinking for daily life events and major life events. When the content of dimension is specific, anti factual thinking can promote behavioral intention compared with experiential thinking; when the content of anti factual thinking is abstract, anti factual thinking can not promote behavioral intention compared with experiential thinking.
【学位授予单位】：西南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：B842

【参考文献】