观察者与参与者的任务经验对规划谬误的影响
发布时间：2018-08-29 16:48
【摘要】：规划谬误(planning fallacy)是指人们在估计未来任务的完成时间时,倾向于过度乐观,低估任务完成时间的一种现象。该现象普遍存在并且对决策判断产生消极影响,因此大量文献致力于讨论其心理机制、影响因素以及应对策略。自Buehler, Griffin和Ross (1994)首次对观察者与参与者在规划谬误中的乐观偏差进行研究后,研究者们开始对该领域进行研究。但是对于规划谬误是否存在着“旁观者清”的现象,目前仍然具有一定的争议。 个体的任务经验是规划谬误的一个重要的影响因素,但是目前尚未发现从观察者与参与者的任务经验角度来探索其对规划谬误的影响,本研究以此为切入点,通过对不同任务经验的中国大学生被试进行点钞任务的实验研究,以此探讨不同任务经验的观察者与参与者在规划谬误中的预测偏差的差异。 研究一通过Buehler等经典规划谬误理论研究者的研究范式研究不同任务经验的大学生被试的任务时间预测行为,研究二通过Roy和Christenfeld等记忆偏差研究者的研究范式研究大学生被试在任务完成后对任务时间估计进行研究,研究三通过3(预测来源：高经验观察者vs.低经验观察者vs.参与者自身)×2(参与者任务经验：高经验vs.低经验)混合设计研究不同任何经验的观察者与参与者的预测偏差的程度的差异。经研究,主要得出以下结论： (1)个体的任务经验水平越高,越容易低估任务所需要的完成时间。 (2)给个体提供类似任务完成时间的准确反馈信息,能够提高个体时间预测的准确度。 (3)在不同任务经验的观察者与参与者的组合中,仅有高经验的观察者与高经验的参与者之间不存在着预测偏差的显著差异。
[Abstract]:Planning fallacy (planning fallacy) is a phenomenon that people tend to overestimate the completion time of future tasks and underestimate the completion time of tasks when estimating the completion time of tasks in the future. This phenomenon is widespread and has a negative impact on decision judgment. Therefore, a lot of literature has been devoted to discussing its psychological mechanism, influencing factors and coping strategies. Since Buehler, Griffin and Ross (1994) first studied the optimistic bias between observers and participants in the planning fallacy, researchers have begun to study this field. However, there are still some controversies about whether the planning fallacy is a "bystander" phenomenon. Individual task experience is an important influence factor of planning fallacy, but it has not been found from the perspective of mission experience of observers and participants to explore its impact on planning fallacy. Through the experimental study on the counting task of Chinese college students with different task experience, the difference of prediction deviation between observers and participants in different task experience in planning fallacy is discussed. The first study studied the task time prediction behavior of college students with different task experience through the research paradigm of classical planning fallacy theory such as Buehler. The second study was based on the research paradigm of memory bias researchers such as Roy and Christenfeld. After the task was completed, the participants studied the task time estimation. The third study was through 3 (predictive source: vs., a highly experienced observer). Low-experience observer vs. Participants themselves) 脳 2 (participant task experience: highly experienced vs. Low-experienced) mixed design studies the degree of bias between observers and participants from any experience. The main conclusions are as follows: (1) the higher the task experience level, the easier it is to underestimate the completion time required for the task. (2) to provide the individual with accurate feedback on similar task completion time. It can improve the accuracy of individual time prediction. (3) in the combination of observers and participants with different task experience, there is no significant difference between the highly experienced observers and the highly experienced participants.
【学位授予单位】：华中师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：B842
本文编号：2211808
[Abstract]:Planning fallacy (planning fallacy) is a phenomenon that people tend to overestimate the completion time of future tasks and underestimate the completion time of tasks when estimating the completion time of tasks in the future. This phenomenon is widespread and has a negative impact on decision judgment. Therefore, a lot of literature has been devoted to discussing its psychological mechanism, influencing factors and coping strategies. Since Buehler, Griffin and Ross (1994) first studied the optimistic bias between observers and participants in the planning fallacy, researchers have begun to study this field. However, there are still some controversies about whether the planning fallacy is a "bystander" phenomenon. Individual task experience is an important influence factor of planning fallacy, but it has not been found from the perspective of mission experience of observers and participants to explore its impact on planning fallacy. Through the experimental study on the counting task of Chinese college students with different task experience, the difference of prediction deviation between observers and participants in different task experience in planning fallacy is discussed. The first study studied the task time prediction behavior of college students with different task experience through the research paradigm of classical planning fallacy theory such as Buehler. The second study was based on the research paradigm of memory bias researchers such as Roy and Christenfeld. After the task was completed, the participants studied the task time estimation. The third study was through 3 (predictive source: vs., a highly experienced observer). Low-experience observer vs. Participants themselves) 脳 2 (participant task experience: highly experienced vs. Low-experienced) mixed design studies the degree of bias between observers and participants from any experience. The main conclusions are as follows: (1) the higher the task experience level, the easier it is to underestimate the completion time required for the task. (2) to provide the individual with accurate feedback on similar task completion time. It can improve the accuracy of individual time prediction. (3) in the combination of observers and participants with different task experience, there is no significant difference between the highly experienced observers and the highly experienced participants.
【学位授予单位】：华中师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：B842
【共引文献】
相关期刊论文 前4条
1 解浪;杨叶;;一种软件工作量估算的不确定性度量方法[J];计算机工程;2012年03期
2 李彬;徐富明;郭永玉;张慧;罗寒冰;郑秋强;;判断与决策中的中等偏上效应[J];心理科学进展;2013年11期
3 滕召军;刘衍玲;刘勇;翟瑞;;乐观偏差的认知神经机制[J];心理科学进展;2014年01期
4 郑秋强;徐富明;罗寒冰;李彬;张慧;;判断与决策中的规划谬误[J];心理科学进展;2014年03期
相关硕士学位论文 前3条
1 李卓;基于回归分析的软件成本估算方法的研究与应用[D];国防科学技术大学;2009年
2 焦玉婷;软件成本估算模型的研究[D];北京工业大学;2013年
3 徐红丹;中学教师的未来时间观、学业乐观感与职业规划的关系研究[D];四川师范大学;2013年
，本文编号：2211808
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/xinlixingwei/2211808.html
