How individuals evaluate the confidence of advice from advisors with high- and low-status: A behavioural and ERP study.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Biological Psychology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-22 DOI:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2024.108978
Xinying Wang, Xiaoyang Huang, Entao Zhang
{"title":"How individuals evaluate the confidence of advice from advisors with high- and low-status: A behavioural and ERP study.","authors":"Xinying Wang, Xiaoyang Huang, Entao Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.biopsycho.2024.108978","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although previous studies have shown that both advisors' social status and confidence level affect advisees' advice-taking behavior, it is currently unclear the mechanisms of their common actions. Here, using event-related potentials, we investigated how both advisors' social status and confidence level independently or jointly influence advice-taking behavior. Specifically, participants were asked to make choices in a dot-estimation task and then they would receive high- and low-confidence advice from advisors with high- and low-status. Behaviorally, an interaction effect between advisors' status and confidence was found, suggesting that individuals were more likely to take high-confidence (vs. low-confidence) advice whether it was from high-status or low-status advisors. However, such an effect of confidence was larger for high-status advisors rather than for low-status advisors. On the electrophysiological level, during the early stage of processing advice, an interaction effect between advisors' status and confidence was only observed on the theta power rather than the FRN component, suggesting that the larger theta power was observed for low-confidence (vs. high-confidence) advice from low-status advisors rather than high-status advisors. Besides, although the larger P3 and beta power were found for advice from high-status advisors (vs. low-status advisors) or advice with high-confidence (vs. low-confidence), no interaction effect between status and confidence was found. Taken together, our findings suggested that advisors' status and confidence might affect the multiple stages in different ways during processing advice.</p>","PeriodicalId":55372,"journal":{"name":"Biological Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"108978"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2024.108978","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although previous studies have shown that both advisors' social status and confidence level affect advisees' advice-taking behavior, it is currently unclear the mechanisms of their common actions. Here, using event-related potentials, we investigated how both advisors' social status and confidence level independently or jointly influence advice-taking behavior. Specifically, participants were asked to make choices in a dot-estimation task and then they would receive high- and low-confidence advice from advisors with high- and low-status. Behaviorally, an interaction effect between advisors' status and confidence was found, suggesting that individuals were more likely to take high-confidence (vs. low-confidence) advice whether it was from high-status or low-status advisors. However, such an effect of confidence was larger for high-status advisors rather than for low-status advisors. On the electrophysiological level, during the early stage of processing advice, an interaction effect between advisors' status and confidence was only observed on the theta power rather than the FRN component, suggesting that the larger theta power was observed for low-confidence (vs. high-confidence) advice from low-status advisors rather than high-status advisors. Besides, although the larger P3 and beta power were found for advice from high-status advisors (vs. low-status advisors) or advice with high-confidence (vs. low-confidence), no interaction effect between status and confidence was found. Taken together, our findings suggested that advisors' status and confidence might affect the multiple stages in different ways during processing advice.

个体如何评价来自高、低地位顾问的建议的信心:一项行为和ERP研究。
虽然之前的研究表明,顾问的社会地位和自信水平都会影响被顾问的建议行为,但目前尚不清楚他们共同行为的机制。本研究采用事件相关电位的方法,研究了建议者的社会地位和自信水平是如何独立或共同影响建议者的行为的。具体来说,参与者被要求在一个点估计任务中做出选择,然后他们将从地位高和地位低的顾问那里得到高和低信心的建议。在行为上,顾问的地位和信心之间存在交互作用,表明个体更有可能接受高地位或低地位顾问的高信心(相对于低信心)建议。然而,这种信心的影响在高地位的顾问中比在低地位的顾问中更大。在电生理水平上,在建议加工的早期阶段,建议者的地位和信心之间的交互作用只在θ波功率上观察到,而在FRN分量上没有观察到,这表明低地位建议者的低信心建议者的低信心建议者比高地位建议者的高信心建议者的低信心建议者的θ波功率更大。此外,虽然高地位建议者的建议(相对于低地位建议者)或高信心建议者的建议(相对于低信心建议者)的P3和beta功率更大,但没有发现地位和信心之间的交互作用。综上所述,我们的研究结果表明,在处理建议的过程中,顾问的地位和信心可能会以不同的方式影响多个阶段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Biological Psychology
Biological Psychology 医学-行为科学
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
11.50%
发文量
146
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Biological Psychology publishes original scientific papers on the biological aspects of psychological states and processes. Biological aspects include electrophysiology and biochemical assessments during psychological experiments as well as biologically induced changes in psychological function. Psychological investigations based on biological theories are also of interest. All aspects of psychological functioning, including psychopathology, are germane. The Journal concentrates on work with human subjects, but may consider work with animal subjects if conceptually related to issues in human biological psychology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信