当不可能进入时看到森林:概率和事件的心理表征

Cheryl J Wakslak, Y. Trope, N. Liberman, Rotem Alony
{"title":"当不可能进入时看到森林:概率和事件的心理表征","authors":"Cheryl J Wakslak, Y. Trope, N. Liberman, Rotem Alony","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.946239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Conceptualizing probability as psychological distance, we draw on construal level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2003) to propose that decreasing an event's probability leads individuals to represent the event by its central, abstract, general features (high-level construal) rather than by its peripheral, concrete, specific features (low-level construal). Results indicated that when reported probabilities of events were low rather than high, participants were more broad (Study 1) and inclusive (Study 2) in their categorization of objects, increased their preference for general rather than specific activity descriptions (Study 3), segmented ongoing behavior into fewer units (Study 4), were more successful at abstracting visual information (Study 5), and were less successful at identifying details missing within a coherent visual whole (Study 6). Further, after exposure to low as opposed to high probability phrases, participants increasingly preferred to identify actions in ends-related rather than means-related terms (Study 7). Implications for probability assessment and choice under uncertainty are discussed.","PeriodicalId":199069,"journal":{"name":"SEIN Social Impacts of Business eJournal","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Seeing the Forest When Entry is Unlikely: Probability and the Mental Representation of Events\",\"authors\":\"Cheryl J Wakslak, Y. Trope, N. Liberman, Rotem Alony\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.946239\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Conceptualizing probability as psychological distance, we draw on construal level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2003) to propose that decreasing an event's probability leads individuals to represent the event by its central, abstract, general features (high-level construal) rather than by its peripheral, concrete, specific features (low-level construal). Results indicated that when reported probabilities of events were low rather than high, participants were more broad (Study 1) and inclusive (Study 2) in their categorization of objects, increased their preference for general rather than specific activity descriptions (Study 3), segmented ongoing behavior into fewer units (Study 4), were more successful at abstracting visual information (Study 5), and were less successful at identifying details missing within a coherent visual whole (Study 6). Further, after exposure to low as opposed to high probability phrases, participants increasingly preferred to identify actions in ends-related rather than means-related terms (Study 7). Implications for probability assessment and choice under uncertainty are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":199069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SEIN Social Impacts of Business eJournal\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SEIN Social Impacts of Business eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.946239\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SEIN Social Impacts of Business eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.946239","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

将概率概念化为心理距离,我们利用解释水平理论(Trope & Liberman, 2003)提出,降低事件的概率会导致个体通过其中心、抽象、一般特征(高级解释)来代表事件,而不是通过其外围、具体、具体的特征(低级解释)。结果表明,当报告的事件概率较低而不是较高时,参与者对对象的分类更加广泛(研究1)和包容(研究2),增加了对一般而不是特定活动描述的偏好(研究3),将正在进行的行为分割成更少的单元(研究4),在抽象视觉信息方面更成功(研究5)。并且在识别连贯视觉整体中缺失的细节方面不太成功(研究6)。此外,在暴露于低概率而不是高概率短语之后,参与者越来越倾向于识别与目的相关的行为,而不是与手段相关的行为(研究7)。本文讨论了不确定性下概率评估和选择的含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Seeing the Forest When Entry is Unlikely: Probability and the Mental Representation of Events
Conceptualizing probability as psychological distance, we draw on construal level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2003) to propose that decreasing an event's probability leads individuals to represent the event by its central, abstract, general features (high-level construal) rather than by its peripheral, concrete, specific features (low-level construal). Results indicated that when reported probabilities of events were low rather than high, participants were more broad (Study 1) and inclusive (Study 2) in their categorization of objects, increased their preference for general rather than specific activity descriptions (Study 3), segmented ongoing behavior into fewer units (Study 4), were more successful at abstracting visual information (Study 5), and were less successful at identifying details missing within a coherent visual whole (Study 6). Further, after exposure to low as opposed to high probability phrases, participants increasingly preferred to identify actions in ends-related rather than means-related terms (Study 7). Implications for probability assessment and choice under uncertainty are discussed.
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