匹配思维与方法:基于调节模式理论的数字同伴增强决策

S. Tretter, Axel Platz, S. Diefenbach
{"title":"匹配思维与方法:基于调节模式理论的数字同伴增强决策","authors":"S. Tretter, Axel Platz, S. Diefenbach","doi":"10.1145/3544548.3581529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Digital companions shall augment complex human processes like extensive decision-making. However, their acceptance may depend upon their ability to adapt to individuals’ psychological states and preferred decision strategies. Regulatory Mode Theory divides human self-regulation into assessment (i.e., making comparisons) and locomotion (i.e., movement from state to state). These regulatory modes are more or less compatible with different decision strategies. In an experimental study (N=81, 2x2-between-subjects design) we explored whether digital companions can gain higher acceptance by considering these compatibilities. Participants were confronted with a decision task. The assisting digital companion first induced a regulatory mode (assessment vs. locomotion) and subsequently presented information according to one of two decision strategies (full evaluation vs. progressive elimination). We show that a fit between regulatory mode and decision strategy (assessment/full evaluation or locomotion/progressive elimination) leads to a favorable evaluation of decisions and the digital companion. No differences regarding decision accuracy and speed were observed.","PeriodicalId":314098,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Matching Mind and Method: Augmented Decision-Making with Digital Companions based on Regulatory Mode Theory\",\"authors\":\"S. Tretter, Axel Platz, S. Diefenbach\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3544548.3581529\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Digital companions shall augment complex human processes like extensive decision-making. However, their acceptance may depend upon their ability to adapt to individuals’ psychological states and preferred decision strategies. Regulatory Mode Theory divides human self-regulation into assessment (i.e., making comparisons) and locomotion (i.e., movement from state to state). These regulatory modes are more or less compatible with different decision strategies. In an experimental study (N=81, 2x2-between-subjects design) we explored whether digital companions can gain higher acceptance by considering these compatibilities. Participants were confronted with a decision task. The assisting digital companion first induced a regulatory mode (assessment vs. locomotion) and subsequently presented information according to one of two decision strategies (full evaluation vs. progressive elimination). We show that a fit between regulatory mode and decision strategy (assessment/full evaluation or locomotion/progressive elimination) leads to a favorable evaluation of decisions and the digital companion. No differences regarding decision accuracy and speed were observed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":314098,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581529\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581529","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

数字伙伴将增强复杂的人类过程,如广泛的决策。然而,他们的接受程度可能取决于他们适应个体心理状态和偏好决策策略的能力。调节模式理论将人类的自我调节分为评估(即进行比较)和运动(即从一种状态移动到另一种状态)。这些监管模式或多或少与不同的决策策略兼容。在一项实验研究(N=81, 2x2-between-subjects设计)中,我们探讨了数字伴侣是否可以通过考虑这些兼容性来获得更高的接受度。参与者面临一项决策任务。辅助的数字同伴首先诱导一个调节模式(评估vs.移动),然后根据两种决策策略(全面评估vs.逐步消除)中的一种提供信息。我们表明,监管模式和决策策略(评估/全面评估或运动/渐进消除)之间的契合导致对决策和数字伴侣的有利评估。在决策准确性和速度方面没有观察到差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Matching Mind and Method: Augmented Decision-Making with Digital Companions based on Regulatory Mode Theory
Digital companions shall augment complex human processes like extensive decision-making. However, their acceptance may depend upon their ability to adapt to individuals’ psychological states and preferred decision strategies. Regulatory Mode Theory divides human self-regulation into assessment (i.e., making comparisons) and locomotion (i.e., movement from state to state). These regulatory modes are more or less compatible with different decision strategies. In an experimental study (N=81, 2x2-between-subjects design) we explored whether digital companions can gain higher acceptance by considering these compatibilities. Participants were confronted with a decision task. The assisting digital companion first induced a regulatory mode (assessment vs. locomotion) and subsequently presented information according to one of two decision strategies (full evaluation vs. progressive elimination). We show that a fit between regulatory mode and decision strategy (assessment/full evaluation or locomotion/progressive elimination) leads to a favorable evaluation of decisions and the digital companion. No differences regarding decision accuracy and speed were observed.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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