Risk aversion in risk-taking tasks: Combined effects of feedback attributes and cognitive reflection ability

被引:2
作者
Li, Wei [1 ,2 ]
Chen, Siliu [1 ,2 ]
Xiao, Zhibing [1 ,2 ]
Li, Dandan [1 ,2 ]
Lv, Chenyu [1 ,2 ]
Zhang, Shuyue [3 ]
Turel, Ofir [4 ]
He, Qinghua [1 ,2 ,3 ,5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Southwest Univ, Fac Psychol, Chongqing, Peoples R China
[2] Southwest Univ, MOE Key Lab Cognit & Personal, Chongqing, Peoples R China
[3] Guangxi Normal Univ, Fac Educ, Dept Psychol, Guilin, Peoples R China
[4] Univ Melbourne, Comp Informat Syst, Parkville, Vic, Australia
[5] Beijing Normal Univ, Southwest Univ Branch, Collaborat Innovat Ctr Assessment Basic Educ Qual, Chongqing, Peoples R China
[6] Beijing Normal Univ, State Key Lab Cognit Neurosci & Learning, Beijing, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
cognitive reflection ability; curiosity theories; feedback effects; risk-taking; WORKING-MEMORY CAPACITY; REGRET AVERSION; DECISION-MAKING; DUAL-PROCESS; CONSEQUENCES; PREFERENCES; CHOICE;
D O I
10.1002/brb3.2957
中图分类号
B84 [心理学]; C [社会科学总论]; Q98 [人类学];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 030303 ; 04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
IntroductionFeedback on human choices is important because it can affect risk-taking and rationality in subsequent decisions. In daily life, choices are not always followed by immediate outcomes nor are they always followed by simple, single-dimensional feedback. Here, we seek to extend previous studies on the effects of feedback on subsequent risk-taking in three experiments. MethodsWe examine whether (1) the effect of feedback immediacy on participants' risk-taking exists in tasks containing explicit probabilistic outcome values; (2) increasing feedback dimensionality from one dimension (only about the outcome) to include a second dimension (also about the "rationality" of prior choices) increases feedback effects on risk-taking; and (3) cognitive reflection ability moderates feedback effects on risk-taking. ResultsResults showed that feedback reduced risk-taking in tasks containing explicit probabilistic outcomes (Studies 1 and 2). They further showed that two-dimensional feedback produces a stronger reduction in risk-taking compared to single-dimensional feedback (Study 3). Lastly, results suggested that cognitive reflection ability moderates the effects of feedback on risk-taking (Study 4). ConclusionTaken together, the findings extended the understanding of risk-taking and mitigating mechanisms and pave the way for intervention studies aimed at changing risky behaviors.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]   RISK AVERSION RELATES TO COGNITIVE ABILITY: PREFERENCES OR NOISE? [J].
Andersson, Ola ;
Holm, Hakan J. ;
Tyran, Jean-Robert ;
Wengstrom, Erik .
JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC ASSOCIATION, 2016, 14 (05) :1129-1154
[2]  
Anthony SBryk Stephen W Raudenbush., 1992, HIERARCHICAL LINEAR
[3]   WHO IS 'BEHAVIORAL'? COGNITIVE ABILITY AND ANOMALOUS PREFERENCES [J].
Benjamin, Daniel J. ;
Brown, Sebastian A. ;
Shapiro, Jesse M. .
JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC ASSOCIATION, 2013, 11 (06) :1231-1255
[4]   Guilt and regret: The determining role of interpersonal and intrapersonal harm [J].
Berndsen, M ;
van der Pligt, J ;
Doosje, B ;
Manstead, ASR .
COGNITION & EMOTION, 2004, 18 (01) :55-70
[6]   Regret in decision making [J].
Connolly, T ;
Zeelenberg, M .
CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2002, 11 (06) :212-216
[7]   Working memory capacity and its relation to general intelligence [J].
Conway, ARA ;
Kane, MJ ;
Engle, RW .
TRENDS IN COGNITIVE SCIENCES, 2003, 7 (12) :547-552
[8]   Cognitive (ir)reflection: New experimental evidence [J].
Cueva, Carlos ;
Iturbe-Ormaetxe, Inigo ;
Mata-Perez, Esther ;
Ponti, Giovanni ;
Sartarelli, Marcello ;
Yu, Haihan ;
Zhukova, Vita .
JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ECONOMICS, 2016, 64 :81-93
[9]   Estimating risk attitudes using lotteries: A large sample approach [J].
Donkers, B ;
Melenberg, B ;
Van Soest, A .
JOURNAL OF RISK AND UNCERTAINTY, 2001, 22 (02) :165-195
[10]   Neurobiology of decision making: A selective review from a neurocognitive and clinical perspective [J].
Ernst, M ;
Paulus, MP .
BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY, 2005, 58 (08) :597-604