Probability as a psychological distance: Construal and preferences

被引:152
作者
Todorov, Alexander
Goren, Amir
Trope, Yaacov
机构
[1] Princeton Univ, Dept Psychol, Princeton, NJ 08544 USA
[2] NYU, Dept Psychol, New York, NY 10003 USA
关键词
judgments; decision making; construal; probability; psychological distance;
D O I
10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
We argue that probability, like space and time, instantiates psychological distance. Unlikely outcomes may seem more remote than likely outcomes and may therefore be construed at a relatively high level. Specifically, when the probability of an outcome is low, ends-related primary features should be more salient than means-related secondary features, but as the probability of the outcome increases, means-related features may become no less and even more salient than ends-related features. Thus, increases in probability should increase the weight of means-related features relative to the weight of ends-related features in decisions, thereby decreasing (or even reversing) the preference for a more desirable/less feasible outcome over a less desirable/more feasible Outcome. We observed this pattern in two experiments. Analyses of judgments, monetary decisions, and self-reported reasons for decisions showed that the weight of means-related features was more sensitive to changes in probability than the weight of ends-related features in decisions. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:473 / 482
页数:10
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]   REVERSALS OF PREFERENCE IN ALLOCATION DECISIONS - JUDGING AN ALTERNATIVE VERSUS CHOOSING AMONG ALTERNATIVES [J].
BAZERMAN, MH ;
LOEWENSTEIN, GF ;
WHITE, SB .
ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, 1992, 37 (02) :220-240
[2]  
Hertwig R., 1998, THINK REASONING, V4, P319, DOI [10.1080/135467898394102, DOI 10.1080/135467898394102]
[3]  
Hsee C. K., 2000, CHOICES VALUES FRAME, P543, DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511803475.032
[4]   Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: A review and theoretical analysis [J].
Hsee, CK ;
Loewenstein, GF ;
Blount, S ;
Bazerman, MH .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1999, 125 (05) :576-590
[5]   Distinction bias: Misprediction and mischoice due to joint evaluation [J].
Hsee, CK ;
Zhang, J .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2004, 86 (05) :680-695
[6]   CHOICES, VALUES, AND FRAMES [J].
KAHNEMAN, D ;
TVERSKY, A .
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, 1984, 39 (04) :341-350
[7]   PROSPECT THEORY - ANALYSIS OF DECISION UNDER RISK [J].
KAHNEMAN, D ;
TVERSKY, A .
ECONOMETRICA, 1979, 47 (02) :263-291
[8]   IMMEDIACY AND CERTAINTY IN INTERTEMPORAL CHOICE [J].
KEREN, G ;
ROELOFSMA, P .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1995, 63 (03) :287-297
[9]  
Lewin K., 1976, FIELD THEORY SOCIAL
[10]   The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory [J].
Liberman, N ;
Trope, Y .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1998, 75 (01) :5-18