在日常生活决策中使用默认选项轻推和个人差异。

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognitive Processing Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-23 DOI:10.1007/s10339-023-01161-1
Micaela Maria Zucchelli, Elisa Gambetti, Fiorella Giusberti, Raffaella Nori
{"title":"在日常生活决策中使用默认选项轻推和个人差异。","authors":"Micaela Maria Zucchelli, Elisa Gambetti, Fiorella Giusberti, Raffaella Nori","doi":"10.1007/s10339-023-01161-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>People often make inefficient decisions for themselves and the community (e.g. they underuse medical screenings or vaccines and they do not vote) also because of their individual characteristics, such as their level of avoidance or anxiety. In recent years, governments have successfully applied strategies, called \"nudges\", to help people maximizing their decisions in several fields; however, the role of individual characteristics has been poorly explored. The present study investigated whether one kind of nudge, the default option (automatic enrolment in a specific plan), can modulate the influence of such individual differences, promoting favourable decisions in different field, such as the medical and civic ones. One hundred and eighty-three participants completed the Trait Anxiety Inventory, the General Decision-Making Styles Inventory and scenarios about health and civic decisions. Participants have hypothetically been enrolled by default or not enrolled in specific plans and had to decide whether adhere or not to the plan proposed. Result showed that the default option drives anxious and avoidant individuals, who usually refuse to make a choice due to their overestimation of negative events' occurrence, to undergo medical screenings and vaccine and to vote more. Nudge confirmed its effectiveness in favouring better decisions among people according to their individual differences.</p>","PeriodicalId":47638,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Processing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of default option nudge and individual differences in everyday life decisions.\",\"authors\":\"Micaela Maria Zucchelli, Elisa Gambetti, Fiorella Giusberti, Raffaella Nori\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10339-023-01161-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>People often make inefficient decisions for themselves and the community (e.g. they underuse medical screenings or vaccines and they do not vote) also because of their individual characteristics, such as their level of avoidance or anxiety. In recent years, governments have successfully applied strategies, called \\\"nudges\\\", to help people maximizing their decisions in several fields; however, the role of individual characteristics has been poorly explored. The present study investigated whether one kind of nudge, the default option (automatic enrolment in a specific plan), can modulate the influence of such individual differences, promoting favourable decisions in different field, such as the medical and civic ones. One hundred and eighty-three participants completed the Trait Anxiety Inventory, the General Decision-Making Styles Inventory and scenarios about health and civic decisions. Participants have hypothetically been enrolled by default or not enrolled in specific plans and had to decide whether adhere or not to the plan proposed. Result showed that the default option drives anxious and avoidant individuals, who usually refuse to make a choice due to their overestimation of negative events' occurrence, to undergo medical screenings and vaccine and to vote more. Nudge confirmed its effectiveness in favouring better decisions among people according to their individual differences.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47638,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Processing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Processing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-023-01161-1\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Processing","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-023-01161-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们经常为自己和社区做出低效的决定(例如,他们没有充分利用医疗筛查或疫苗,也没有投票),这也是因为他们的个人特征,比如他们的回避或焦虑程度。近年来,政府成功地应用了被称为“推动”的策略,帮助人们在几个领域最大限度地做出决策;然而,对个体特征的作用却很少有人探究。本研究调查了一种推动,即默认选项(自动加入特定计划),是否可以调节这种个体差异的影响,促进不同领域的有利决策,如医疗和公民决策。183名参与者完成了特质焦虑量表、一般决策风格量表以及关于健康和公民决策的情景。参与者假设默认加入或未加入特定计划,必须决定是否遵守提议的计划。结果显示,默认选项会驱使焦虑和逃避的人接受医学筛查和疫苗接种,并投票更多。这些人通常因高估负面事件的发生而拒绝做出选择。Nudge证实了它在根据人们的个体差异做出更好决定方面的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Use of default option nudge and individual differences in everyday life decisions.

People often make inefficient decisions for themselves and the community (e.g. they underuse medical screenings or vaccines and they do not vote) also because of their individual characteristics, such as their level of avoidance or anxiety. In recent years, governments have successfully applied strategies, called "nudges", to help people maximizing their decisions in several fields; however, the role of individual characteristics has been poorly explored. The present study investigated whether one kind of nudge, the default option (automatic enrolment in a specific plan), can modulate the influence of such individual differences, promoting favourable decisions in different field, such as the medical and civic ones. One hundred and eighty-three participants completed the Trait Anxiety Inventory, the General Decision-Making Styles Inventory and scenarios about health and civic decisions. Participants have hypothetically been enrolled by default or not enrolled in specific plans and had to decide whether adhere or not to the plan proposed. Result showed that the default option drives anxious and avoidant individuals, who usually refuse to make a choice due to their overestimation of negative events' occurrence, to undergo medical screenings and vaccine and to vote more. Nudge confirmed its effectiveness in favouring better decisions among people according to their individual differences.

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
Cognitive Processing
Cognitive Processing PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
5.90%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: Cognitive Processing - International Quarterly of Cognitive Science is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes innovative contributions in the multidisciplinary field of cognitive science.  Its main purpose is to stimulate research and scientific interaction through communication between specialists in different fields on topics of common interest and to promote an interdisciplinary understanding of the diverse topics in contemporary cognitive science. Cognitive Processing is articulated in the following sections:Cognitive DevelopmentCognitive Models of Risk and Decision MakingCognitive NeuroscienceCognitive PsychologyComputational Cognitive SciencesPhilosophy of MindNeuroimaging and Electrophysiological MethodsPsycholinguistics and Computational linguisticsQuantitative Psychology and Formal Theories in Cognitive ScienceSocial Cognition and Cognitive Science of Culture
期刊最新文献
Autistic and non-autistic adults use discourse context to determine a speaker's intention to request. Testing the dual-memory framework: individual differences in the magnitude of the retrieval practice effect and fluid intelligence The effect of cognitive intervention program on intelligence scores in preschool Choosing between bad and worse: investigating choice in moral dilemmas through the lens of control. The impact of cognitive flexibility on prospective EFL teachers' critical thinking disposition: the mediating role of self-efficacy.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1