Alex Monson, Richard J E James, Robyn E Wootton, Philip Newall
{"title":"控制幻觉还是被动迷信？非理性赌博信念的两种解释比较。","authors":"Alex Monson, Richard J E James, Robyn E Wootton, Philip Newall","doi":"10.1037/adb0001036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The \"illusion of control\" is a dominant cognitive illusion in disordered gambling, but its role in shaping irrational gambling beliefs has been questioned by recent null experimental findings. Here, we aimed to test this recent work, in a preregistered Bayesian framework, by additionally correlating the dependent variable (nonuniform probabilistic beliefs) with self-reported gambling behavior and by exploring \"passive superstition\" as an alternative driver of these irrational gambling beliefs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A between-participants online experiment involving three boxes, one of which a $1 prize was randomly assigned to (<i>N</i> = 3,064; 49.1% males, 49.5% females, 1.4% other; <i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 42.5 years). Participants estimated the likelihood of each box winning, with any estimates outside the 33%-34% interval categorized as irrational \"nonuniform\" probabilistic beliefs. \"Preselection\" participants gave estimates prior to box selection, \"post-no-choice\" participants had their box randomly selected, and participants in the treatment \"postchoice\" condition selected their own box. Whether participants gambled within the past 12 months (gambling status), Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) score, and passive superstition scores were used as additional predictors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparing postchoice participants with post-no-choice participants (95% CI [0.80, 1.22]) and comparing postchoice with preselection participants (95% CI [0.88, 1.34]) yielded substantial support for a null effect. Gambling status supported substantial evidence for a null effect (95% CI [0.92, 1.30]), whereas higher PGSI (95% CI [1.08, 1.13]) and higher passive superstition scores (95% CI [1.08, 1.10]) overwhelmingly predicted our outcome.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Active choice elements in illusions of control may have been overemphasized in irrational gambling beliefs compared to passive superstitions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48325,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Addictive Behaviors","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Illusion of control or passive superstition? A comparison of two explanations for irrational gambling beliefs.\",\"authors\":\"Alex Monson, Richard J E James, Robyn E Wootton, Philip Newall\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/adb0001036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The \\\"illusion of control\\\" is a dominant cognitive illusion in disordered gambling, but its role in shaping irrational gambling beliefs has been questioned by recent null experimental findings. Here, we aimed to test this recent work, in a preregistered Bayesian framework, by additionally correlating the dependent variable (nonuniform probabilistic beliefs) with self-reported gambling behavior and by exploring \\\"passive superstition\\\" as an alternative driver of these irrational gambling beliefs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A between-participants online experiment involving three boxes, one of which a $1 prize was randomly assigned to (<i>N</i> = 3,064; 49.1% males, 49.5% females, 1.4% other; <i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 42.5 years). Participants estimated the likelihood of each box winning, with any estimates outside the 33%-34% interval categorized as irrational \\\"nonuniform\\\" probabilistic beliefs. \\\"Preselection\\\" participants gave estimates prior to box selection, \\\"post-no-choice\\\" participants had their box randomly selected, and participants in the treatment \\\"postchoice\\\" condition selected their own box. Whether participants gambled within the past 12 months (gambling status), Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) score, and passive superstition scores were used as additional predictors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparing postchoice participants with post-no-choice participants (95% CI [0.80, 1.22]) and comparing postchoice with preselection participants (95% CI [0.88, 1.34]) yielded substantial support for a null effect. Gambling status supported substantial evidence for a null effect (95% CI [0.92, 1.30]), whereas higher PGSI (95% CI [1.08, 1.13]) and higher passive superstition scores (95% CI [1.08, 1.10]) overwhelmingly predicted our outcome.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Active choice elements in illusions of control may have been overemphasized in irrational gambling beliefs compared to passive superstitions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48325,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology of Addictive Behaviors\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology of Addictive Behaviors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0001036\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Addictive Behaviors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0001036","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的：控制幻觉 "是导致赌博紊乱的主要认知幻觉，但最近的无效实验结果却对其在形成非理性赌博信念中的作用提出了质疑。在此，我们旨在通过将因变量（非均匀概率信念）与自我报告的赌博行为相关联，并通过探索 "被动迷信 "作为这些非理性赌博信念的另一种驱动因素，在预先登记的贝叶斯框架内检验最近的研究成果：参与者之间的在线实验，涉及三个盒子，其中一个随机分配 1 美元奖金（N = 3,064；49.1% 为男性，49.5% 为女性，1.4% 为其他；年龄 = 42.5 岁）。参与者估计每个盒子中奖的可能性，任何超出 33%-34% 区间的估计都被归类为非理性的 "非均匀 "概率信念。"预选 "参与者在选择盒子之前做出估计，"后不选择 "参与者随机选择盒子，"后选择 "条件参与者自己选择盒子。参与者在过去 12 个月内是否赌博（赌博状态）、问题赌博严重程度指数（PGSI）得分和被动迷信得分被用作额外的预测因素：将选择后参与者与非选择后参与者进行比较（95% CI [0.80，1.22]），并将选择后参与者与选择前参与者进行比较（95% CI [0.88，1.34]），结果表明，选择后参与者与非选择后参与者的比较在很大程度上支持无效效应。赌博状况也证实了无效效应（95% CI [0.92，1.30]），而较高的PGSI（95% CI [1.08，1.13]）和较高的被动迷信得分（95% CI [1.08，1.10]）则对我们的结果有压倒性的预测作用：结论：与被动迷信相比，非理性赌博信念中控制幻觉的主动选择因素可能被过分强调了。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有）。
Illusion of control or passive superstition? A comparison of two explanations for irrational gambling beliefs.
Objective: The "illusion of control" is a dominant cognitive illusion in disordered gambling, but its role in shaping irrational gambling beliefs has been questioned by recent null experimental findings. Here, we aimed to test this recent work, in a preregistered Bayesian framework, by additionally correlating the dependent variable (nonuniform probabilistic beliefs) with self-reported gambling behavior and by exploring "passive superstition" as an alternative driver of these irrational gambling beliefs.
Method: A between-participants online experiment involving three boxes, one of which a $1 prize was randomly assigned to (N = 3,064; 49.1% males, 49.5% females, 1.4% other; Mage = 42.5 years). Participants estimated the likelihood of each box winning, with any estimates outside the 33%-34% interval categorized as irrational "nonuniform" probabilistic beliefs. "Preselection" participants gave estimates prior to box selection, "post-no-choice" participants had their box randomly selected, and participants in the treatment "postchoice" condition selected their own box. Whether participants gambled within the past 12 months (gambling status), Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) score, and passive superstition scores were used as additional predictors.
Results: Comparing postchoice participants with post-no-choice participants (95% CI [0.80, 1.22]) and comparing postchoice with preselection participants (95% CI [0.88, 1.34]) yielded substantial support for a null effect. Gambling status supported substantial evidence for a null effect (95% CI [0.92, 1.30]), whereas higher PGSI (95% CI [1.08, 1.13]) and higher passive superstition scores (95% CI [1.08, 1.10]) overwhelmingly predicted our outcome.
Conclusions: Active choice elements in illusions of control may have been overemphasized in irrational gambling beliefs compared to passive superstitions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍：
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors publishes peer-reviewed original articles related to the psychological aspects of addictive behaviors. The journal includes articles on the following topics: - alcohol and alcoholism - drug use and abuse - eating disorders - smoking and nicotine addiction, and other excessive behaviors (e.g., gambling) Full-length research reports, literature reviews, brief reports, and comments are published.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
