个体决策风格及风险偏好研究

发布时间：2018-04-11 00:01

本文选题：决策风格 + 风险偏好　；参考：《西南大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 现实生活中,人们从不断经历着做决定的过程。做决定是一件非常不容易的事,因为人们在做决定时往往面对不确定的环境,一旦做出决定,就意味着对未来有一定程度的冒险,而人们总希望能“鱼与熊掌”兼得。通常,我们相信,人们在做决定的时候有一个较为稳定的模式。从心理学的角度来说,个体在做决策时通常有一个较为稳定的决策风格和风险偏好。然而过去国内外对于个体决策风格和风险偏好的研究中,并没有指出个体对于简单认知加工的风险决策是否依然遵从其自身稳定的决策风格和风险偏好。本研究旨在探索个体决策风格和风险偏好在简单认知加工时是否具有稳定性,同时,开发一种严格控制实验条件的测量方法,试图用速度与准确率权衡范式来预测个体的决策风格和风险偏好,为发展一种新的测评个体决策风格和风险偏好的方法打下基础。本研究用人格测评量表MBTI量表测评被试,将量表得分在思考(T)-情感(F)维度上T分于16-20之间的被试定义为分析型决策风格,F分于16-20之间的被试定义为启发型决策风格,这样将所有被试分为两组进行实验。研究借用速度与准确率权衡范式(SAT范式),采用2×5两因素混合实验设计,在严格控制条件的实验环境中对被试进行施测。实验假设：如果个体为分析型决策风格,则个体在简单认知加工过程中更加追求准确率；如果个体为启发型决策风格,则个体在简单认知加工过程中更加追求速度。实验使用E-prime软件编写的实验程序,用招募的方式吸引被试30名,均为西南大学学生。实验被试间因素为被试分组后的类型,此因素有2个水平——分析型组、启发型组。被试内因素为预备信号发出到呈现刺激之间的时间间隔,此因素有5个水平——100毫秒、300毫秒、500毫秒、700毫秒、900毫秒。时间间隔的每种水平随机呈现30次(红点、绿点各15次),共有150次实验处理。两组被试对随机出现的红色小点和绿色小点作出不同反应。实验测得所有被试的选择反应时和反应正确率。经SPSS15.0统计分析,得到以下结果。第一,在5种时间间隔水平上,分析型组被试反应时均长于启发型组被试,正确率均高于启发型组被试。第二,被试类型和时间间隔之间交互作用极其显著。第三,经简单效应检验,分组因素对于因变量——反应时和正确率的影响显示,在时间间隔的每种水平上,两组被试的反应时和正确率都有极其显著的差异。由此可以得出以下结论：第一,如果个体为分析型决策风格,则个体在速度与准确率权衡中更加追求准确率；如果个体为启发型决策风格,则个体在速度与准确率权衡中更加追求速度。第二,由于目前还没有一种非常精确的判断被试的风险偏好类型的方法,经SAT实验验证,人们在进行简单认知加工时,决策风格和风险偏好遵从其一贯的模式,从而得知SAT范式可以作为一种判断被试风险偏好类型的方法,但其结果的精确程度尚需进一步验证。第三,经实验验证,MBTI量表具有较高生态学效度。第四,决策风格和风险偏好作为个体人格的构成部分,是具有稳定性的。
[Abstract]:In real life , people are going through the process of making decisions . It is not easy to make decisions because people often face uncertain circumstances when making decisions , and once decisions are made , it means a certain degree of adventure for the future , and people always want to be able to " fish and bear the paw " .

Generally speaking , we believe that there is a more stable model in making decisions . From the perspective of psychology , individuals usually have a more stable decision - making style and risk preference when making decisions . However , there is no point in the study of individual decision - making styles and risk appetite .

In this study , the personality assessment scale ( MBTI ) scale was used to measure the scale scores in the thinking ( T ) - emotion ( F ) dimension . T scores between 16 and 20 were defined as analytical decision styles , and F scores between 16 and 20 were defined as heuristic decision styles .
If the individual is the heuristic decision - making style , the individual will seek speed in a simple cognitive process .

The experiment was conducted using the E - prime software , and 30 of them were recruited in the way of recruitment . The experiment was divided into two groups : two horizontal _ analysis groups and heuristic groups . The factors included five levels _ 100 milliseconds , 300 milliseconds , 500 milliseconds , 700 milliseconds , 900 milliseconds . Each level of time interval was randomly presented for 30 times ( red spots , green points 15 times ) , and 150 experimental treatments were conducted . Two groups were tested for different responses to the randomly appearing red dots and green dots .

The following results were obtained by SPSS 15.0 statistical analysis .

First , at 5 time intervals , the analysis group was longer than the heuristic group and the correct rate was higher than that of the heuristic group .

Second , the interaction between the tested type and the time interval is extremely significant .

Thirdly , through the simple effect test , the influence of the grouping factors on the factor _ response and the accuracy rate shows that at every level of the time interval , there are extremely significant differences between the two groups of the reaction time and the correct rate .

The following conclusions can thus be drawn :

First , if the individual is the analytical decision - making style , the individual is more accurate in speed and accuracy trade - off ;
If the individual is the heuristic decision - making style , the individual is more likely to seek speed in terms of speed and accuracy .

Second , because there is not yet a very accurate method of judging the risk preference type of the tested risk preference type , the decision - making style and the risk preference conform to the consistent pattern when the simple cognitive processing is carried out , so that the SAT paradigm can be used as a method of judging the type of the tested risk preference , but the accuracy of the result is still further verified .

Thirdly , the MBTI scale has higher ecological validity through experiments .

Fourthly , the decision - making style and the risk preference as the constituent parts of the individual personality are of stability .

【学位授予单位】：西南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：C934

【引证文献】