Balca Alaybek , Reeshad S. Dalal , Shea Fyffe , John A. Aitken , You Zhou , Xiao Qu , Alexis Roman , Julia I. Baines
{"title":"结局好(顶峰好)的都是好?峰值结束规则和持续时间忽视的荟萃分析","authors":"Balca Alaybek , Reeshad S. Dalal , Shea Fyffe , John A. Aitken , You Zhou , Xiao Qu , Alexis Roman , Julia I. Baines","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104149","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The peak-end rule (<span>Fredrickson & Kahneman, 1993</span>) asserts that, when people retrospectively evaluate an experience (e.g., the previous workday), they rely more heavily on the episode with peak intensity and on the final (end) episode than on other episodes in the experience. We meta-analyzed 174 effect sizes and found strong support for the peak-end rule. The peak-end effect on retrospective summary evaluations was: (1) large (<em>r</em> = 0.581, 95% Confidence Interval = 0.487–0.661), (2) robust across boundary conditions, (3) comparable to the effect of the overall average (mean) score and stronger than the effects of the trend and variability across all episodes in the experience, (4) stronger than the effects of the first (beginning) and lowest intensity (trough) episodes, and (5) stronger than the effect of the duration of the experience (which was essentially nil, thereby supporting the idea of duration neglect; <span>Fredrickson & Kahneman, 1993</span>). We provide a future research agenda and practical implications.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"All’s well that ends (and peaks) well? A meta-analysis of the peak-end rule and duration neglect\",\"authors\":\"Balca Alaybek , Reeshad S. Dalal , Shea Fyffe , John A. Aitken , You Zhou , Xiao Qu , Alexis Roman , Julia I. Baines\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104149\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The peak-end rule (<span>Fredrickson & Kahneman, 1993</span>) asserts that, when people retrospectively evaluate an experience (e.g., the previous workday), they rely more heavily on the episode with peak intensity and on the final (end) episode than on other episodes in the experience. We meta-analyzed 174 effect sizes and found strong support for the peak-end rule. The peak-end effect on retrospective summary evaluations was: (1) large (<em>r</em> = 0.581, 95% Confidence Interval = 0.487–0.661), (2) robust across boundary conditions, (3) comparable to the effect of the overall average (mean) score and stronger than the effects of the trend and variability across all episodes in the experience, (4) stronger than the effects of the first (beginning) and lowest intensity (trough) episodes, and (5) stronger than the effect of the duration of the experience (which was essentially nil, thereby supporting the idea of duration neglect; <span>Fredrickson & Kahneman, 1993</span>). We provide a future research agenda and practical implications.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597822000334\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597822000334","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
All’s well that ends (and peaks) well? A meta-analysis of the peak-end rule and duration neglect
The peak-end rule (Fredrickson & Kahneman, 1993) asserts that, when people retrospectively evaluate an experience (e.g., the previous workday), they rely more heavily on the episode with peak intensity and on the final (end) episode than on other episodes in the experience. We meta-analyzed 174 effect sizes and found strong support for the peak-end rule. The peak-end effect on retrospective summary evaluations was: (1) large (r = 0.581, 95% Confidence Interval = 0.487–0.661), (2) robust across boundary conditions, (3) comparable to the effect of the overall average (mean) score and stronger than the effects of the trend and variability across all episodes in the experience, (4) stronger than the effects of the first (beginning) and lowest intensity (trough) episodes, and (5) stronger than the effect of the duration of the experience (which was essentially nil, thereby supporting the idea of duration neglect; Fredrickson & Kahneman, 1993). We provide a future research agenda and practical implications.
期刊介绍：
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes publishes fundamental research in organizational behavior, organizational psychology, and human cognition, judgment, and decision-making. The journal features articles that present original empirical research, theory development, meta-analysis, and methodological advancements relevant to the substantive domains served by the journal. Topics covered by the journal include perception, cognition, judgment, attitudes, emotion, well-being, motivation, choice, and performance. We are interested in articles that investigate these topics as they pertain to individuals, dyads, groups, and other social collectives. For each topic, we place a premium on articles that make fundamental and substantial contributions to understanding psychological processes relevant to human attitudes, cognitions, and behavior in organizations. In order to be considered for publication in OBHDP a manuscript has to include the following: 1.Demonstrate an interesting behavioral/psychological phenomenon 2.Make a significant theoretical and empirical contribution to the existing literature 3.Identify and test the underlying psychological mechanism for the newly discovered behavioral/psychological phenomenon 4.Have practical implications in organizational context
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
