图标阵列在重复风险决策任务中传达风险的效果

IF 1.9 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI:10.1017/s1930297500009153
P. C. Price, Grace A. Carlock, Sarah Crouse, Mariana Vargas Arciga
{"title":"图标阵列在重复风险决策任务中传达风险的效果","authors":"P. C. Price, Grace A. Carlock, Sarah Crouse, Mariana Vargas Arciga","doi":"10.1017/s1930297500009153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In two experiments, participants decided on each of several trials\n whether or not to take a risk. If they chose to take the risk, they had a\n relatively high probability (from 75% to 95%) of winning a small number of\n points and a relatively low probability (5% to 25%) of losing a large number\n of points. The loss amounts varied so that the expected value of taking the\n risk was positive on some trials, zero on others, and negative on the rest.\n The main independent variable was whether the probability of losing was\n communicated using numerical percentages or icon arrays. Both experiments\n included random icon arrays, in which the icons representing losses were\n randomly distributed throughout the array. Experiment 2 also included\n grouped icon arrays, in which the icons representing losses were grouped at\n the bottom of the array. Neither type of icon array led to better\n performance in the task. However, the random icon arrays led to less risk\n taking than the numerical percentages or the grouped icon arrays, especially\n at the higher loss probabilities. In a third experiment, participants made\n direct judgments of the percentages and probabilities represented by the\n icon arrays from Experiment 2. The results supported the idea that random\n arrays lead to less risk taking because they are perceived to represent\n greater loss probabilities. These results have several implications for the\n study of icon arrays and their use in risk communication.","PeriodicalId":48045,"journal":{"name":"Judgment and Decision Making","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of icon arrays to communicate risk in a repeated risky\\n decision-making task\",\"authors\":\"P. C. Price, Grace A. Carlock, Sarah Crouse, Mariana Vargas Arciga\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s1930297500009153\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In two experiments, participants decided on each of several trials\\n whether or not to take a risk. If they chose to take the risk, they had a\\n relatively high probability (from 75% to 95%) of winning a small number of\\n points and a relatively low probability (5% to 25%) of losing a large number\\n of points. The loss amounts varied so that the expected value of taking the\\n risk was positive on some trials, zero on others, and negative on the rest.\\n The main independent variable was whether the probability of losing was\\n communicated using numerical percentages or icon arrays. Both experiments\\n included random icon arrays, in which the icons representing losses were\\n randomly distributed throughout the array. Experiment 2 also included\\n grouped icon arrays, in which the icons representing losses were grouped at\\n the bottom of the array. Neither type of icon array led to better\\n performance in the task. However, the random icon arrays led to less risk\\n taking than the numerical percentages or the grouped icon arrays, especially\\n at the higher loss probabilities. In a third experiment, participants made\\n direct judgments of the percentages and probabilities represented by the\\n icon arrays from Experiment 2. The results supported the idea that random\\n arrays lead to less risk taking because they are perceived to represent\\n greater loss probabilities. These results have several implications for the\\n study of icon arrays and their use in risk communication.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48045,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Judgment and Decision Making\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Judgment and Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1930297500009153\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Judgment and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1930297500009153","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在两个实验中,参与者在几个试验中的每一个试验中都决定是否冒险。如果他们选择冒险,他们赢得少量积分的概率相对较高(从75%到95%),而失去大量积分的概率则相对较低(5%到25%)。损失金额各不相同,因此在一些试验中,承担风险的预期值为正,在其他试验中为零,在其余试验中为负。主要自变量是损失的概率是通过数字百分比还是图标数组来传达的。两个实验都包括随机图标阵列,其中表示损失的图标随机分布在整个阵列中。实验2还包括分组的图标阵列,其中表示损失的图标被分组在阵列的底部。这两种类型的图标阵列都无法在任务中获得更好的性能。然而,与数字百分比或分组图标阵列相比,随机图标阵列导致的风险较小,尤其是在较高的损失概率下。在第三个实验中,参与者直接判断实验2中图标阵列所代表的百分比和概率。研究结果支持了这样一种观点,即随机阵列会减少风险承担,因为它们被认为代表了更大的损失概率。这些结果对图标阵列的研究及其在风险沟通中的应用具有若干启示。
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
Effects of icon arrays to communicate risk in a repeated risky decision-making task
In two experiments, participants decided on each of several trials whether or not to take a risk. If they chose to take the risk, they had a relatively high probability (from 75% to 95%) of winning a small number of points and a relatively low probability (5% to 25%) of losing a large number of points. The loss amounts varied so that the expected value of taking the risk was positive on some trials, zero on others, and negative on the rest. The main independent variable was whether the probability of losing was communicated using numerical percentages or icon arrays. Both experiments included random icon arrays, in which the icons representing losses were randomly distributed throughout the array. Experiment 2 also included grouped icon arrays, in which the icons representing losses were grouped at the bottom of the array. Neither type of icon array led to better performance in the task. However, the random icon arrays led to less risk taking than the numerical percentages or the grouped icon arrays, especially at the higher loss probabilities. In a third experiment, participants made direct judgments of the percentages and probabilities represented by the icon arrays from Experiment 2. The results supported the idea that random arrays lead to less risk taking because they are perceived to represent greater loss probabilities. These results have several implications for the study of icon arrays and their use in risk communication.
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
Judgment and Decision Making
Judgment and Decision Making PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
The benefits of deciding now and not later: The influence of the timing between acquiring knowledge and deciding on decision confidence, omission neglect bias, and choice deferral I want to believe: Prior beliefs influence judgments about the effectiveness of both alternative and scientific medicine The final step effect Choosing more aggressive commitment contracts for others than for the self Systematic metacognitive reflection helps people discover far-sighted decision strategies: A process-tracing experiment
×
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