受认知偏差影响的决策差异:考察人类价值观、认知需求和计算能力。

IF 1.5 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Regis K Kakinohana, Ronaldo Pilati
{"title":"受认知偏差影响的决策差异:考察人类价值观、认知需求和计算能力。","authors":"Regis K Kakinohana, Ronaldo Pilati","doi":"10.1186/s41155-023-00265-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A better understanding of factors that can affect preferences and choices may contribute to more accurate decision-making. Several studies have investigated the effects of cognitive biases on decision-making and their relationship with cognitive abilities and thinking dispositions. While studies on behaviour, attitude, personality, and health worries have examined their relationship with human values, research on cognitive bias has not investigated its relationship to individual differences in human values. The purpose of this study was to explore individual differences in biased choices, examining the relationships of the human values self-direction, conformity, power, and universalism with the anchoring effect, the framing effect, the certainty effect, and the outcome bias, as well as the mediation of need for cognition and the moderation of numeracy in these relationships. We measured individual differences and within-participant effects with an online questionnaire completed by 409 Brazilian participants, with an age range from 18 to 80 years, 56.7% female, and 43.3% male. The cognitive biases studied consistently influenced choices and preferences. However, the biases showed distinct relationships with the individual differences investigated, indicating the involvement of diverse psychological mechanisms. For example, people who value more self-direction were less affected only by anchoring. Hence, people more susceptible to one bias were not similarly susceptible to another. This can help in research on how to weaken or strengthen cognitive biases and heuristics.</p>","PeriodicalId":46901,"journal":{"name":"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10485213/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in decisions affected by cognitive biases: examining human values, need for cognition, and numeracy.\",\"authors\":\"Regis K Kakinohana, Ronaldo Pilati\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41155-023-00265-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A better understanding of factors that can affect preferences and choices may contribute to more accurate decision-making. Several studies have investigated the effects of cognitive biases on decision-making and their relationship with cognitive abilities and thinking dispositions. While studies on behaviour, attitude, personality, and health worries have examined their relationship with human values, research on cognitive bias has not investigated its relationship to individual differences in human values. The purpose of this study was to explore individual differences in biased choices, examining the relationships of the human values self-direction, conformity, power, and universalism with the anchoring effect, the framing effect, the certainty effect, and the outcome bias, as well as the mediation of need for cognition and the moderation of numeracy in these relationships. We measured individual differences and within-participant effects with an online questionnaire completed by 409 Brazilian participants, with an age range from 18 to 80 years, 56.7% female, and 43.3% male. The cognitive biases studied consistently influenced choices and preferences. However, the biases showed distinct relationships with the individual differences investigated, indicating the involvement of diverse psychological mechanisms. For example, people who value more self-direction were less affected only by anchoring. Hence, people more susceptible to one bias were not similarly susceptible to another. This can help in research on how to weaken or strengthen cognitive biases and heuristics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10485213/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-023-00265-z\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-023-00265-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

更好地了解影响偏好和选择的因素可能有助于做出更准确的决策。一些研究调查了认知偏差对决策的影响及其与认知能力和思维倾向的关系。虽然对行为、态度、个性和健康担忧的研究考察了它们与人类价值观的关系,但对认知偏见的研究尚未调查其与人类价值观的个体差异的关系。本研究旨在探讨人的自我导向、从众、权力和普遍主义价值观与锚定效应、框架效应、确定性效应和结果偏差之间的关系,以及认知需求和计算能力在这些关系中的中介作用。我们通过409名巴西参与者完成的在线问卷测量了个体差异和参与者内部效应,年龄范围从18岁到80岁,56.7%为女性,43.3%为男性。所研究的认知偏差始终影响着选择和偏好。然而,这些偏差与所调查的个体差异有明显的关系,表明涉及多种心理机制。例如,那些更重视自我指导的人只受到锚定的影响较小。因此,更容易受到一种偏见影响的人对另一种偏见的影响并不相同。这有助于研究如何削弱或加强认知偏见和启发式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Differences in decisions affected by cognitive biases: examining human values, need for cognition, and numeracy.

Differences in decisions affected by cognitive biases: examining human values, need for cognition, and numeracy.

Differences in decisions affected by cognitive biases: examining human values, need for cognition, and numeracy.

Differences in decisions affected by cognitive biases: examining human values, need for cognition, and numeracy.

A better understanding of factors that can affect preferences and choices may contribute to more accurate decision-making. Several studies have investigated the effects of cognitive biases on decision-making and their relationship with cognitive abilities and thinking dispositions. While studies on behaviour, attitude, personality, and health worries have examined their relationship with human values, research on cognitive bias has not investigated its relationship to individual differences in human values. The purpose of this study was to explore individual differences in biased choices, examining the relationships of the human values self-direction, conformity, power, and universalism with the anchoring effect, the framing effect, the certainty effect, and the outcome bias, as well as the mediation of need for cognition and the moderation of numeracy in these relationships. We measured individual differences and within-participant effects with an online questionnaire completed by 409 Brazilian participants, with an age range from 18 to 80 years, 56.7% female, and 43.3% male. The cognitive biases studied consistently influenced choices and preferences. However, the biases showed distinct relationships with the individual differences investigated, indicating the involvement of diverse psychological mechanisms. For example, people who value more self-direction were less affected only by anchoring. Hence, people more susceptible to one bias were not similarly susceptible to another. This can help in research on how to weaken or strengthen cognitive biases and heuristics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica
Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: Psicologia: Reflexão & Crítica is a journal published three times a year by Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia do Desenvolvimento (Psychology Graduate Program) of the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul - UFRGS (Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul). Its objective is to publish original works in the psychology field: articles, short reports on research and reviews as well as to present to the scientific community texts which reflect a significant contribution for the psychology field. The short title of the journal is Psicol. Refl. Crít. It must be used regarding bibliographies, footnotes, as well as bibliographical strips and references.
×
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