积极情绪对冒险的影响:关键时刻

Alice M. Isen, Robert Patrick
{"title":"积极情绪对冒险的影响:关键时刻","authors":"Alice M. Isen,&nbsp;Robert Patrick","doi":"10.1016/0030-5073(83)90120-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Two studies conducted simultaneously investigated the influence of positive affect on risk taking. Results of the study, which employed an actual measure of subjects' willingness to bet something of value, supported the prediction of an interaction between level of risk and positive affect: subjects who had reason to be feeling elated bet more than control subjects on a low-risk bet, but wagered less than controls on a high-risk bet. At the same time, in contrast, a study involving hypothetical risk-taking showed that in general subjects were more willing to take the chance as probability of success went up; but that elated subjects were more daring than controls on a “long shot.” Differences in hypothetical vs real risk taking were noted, and the complexity (the interaction) of the influence of positive feelings on real risk taking was emphasized. The results were related to other research suggesting an influence of feeling states on cognitive processes and decision making.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":76928,"journal":{"name":"Organizational behavior and human performance","volume":"31 2","pages":"Pages 194-202"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1983-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0030-5073(83)90120-4","citationCount":"600","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effect of positive feelings on risk taking: When the chips are down\",\"authors\":\"Alice M. Isen,&nbsp;Robert Patrick\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0030-5073(83)90120-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Two studies conducted simultaneously investigated the influence of positive affect on risk taking. Results of the study, which employed an actual measure of subjects' willingness to bet something of value, supported the prediction of an interaction between level of risk and positive affect: subjects who had reason to be feeling elated bet more than control subjects on a low-risk bet, but wagered less than controls on a high-risk bet. At the same time, in contrast, a study involving hypothetical risk-taking showed that in general subjects were more willing to take the chance as probability of success went up; but that elated subjects were more daring than controls on a “long shot.” Differences in hypothetical vs real risk taking were noted, and the complexity (the interaction) of the influence of positive feelings on real risk taking was emphasized. The results were related to other research suggesting an influence of feeling states on cognitive processes and decision making.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76928,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational behavior and human performance\",\"volume\":\"31 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 194-202\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1983-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0030-5073(83)90120-4\",\"citationCount\":\"600\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational behavior and human performance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0030507383901204\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational behavior and human performance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0030507383901204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 600

摘要

同时进行的两项研究调查了积极情绪对冒险行为的影响。这项研究采用了一种实际测量受试者对有价值的东西下注意愿的方法,其结果支持了风险水平与积极影响之间相互作用的预测:在低风险的赌注中,有理由感到高兴的受试者比对照组的受试者下注更多,但在高风险的赌注中,他们的赌注比对照组的受试者少。与此同时,与此相反,一项涉及假设冒险的研究表明,一般来说,随着成功可能性的增加,受试者更愿意冒险;但是,兴高采烈的受试者在“长镜头”上比对照组更大胆。注意到假设风险与实际风险承担的差异,并强调了积极情绪对实际风险承担影响的复杂性(相互作用)。这一结果与其他研究有关,表明情绪状态对认知过程和决策的影响。
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
The effect of positive feelings on risk taking: When the chips are down

Two studies conducted simultaneously investigated the influence of positive affect on risk taking. Results of the study, which employed an actual measure of subjects' willingness to bet something of value, supported the prediction of an interaction between level of risk and positive affect: subjects who had reason to be feeling elated bet more than control subjects on a low-risk bet, but wagered less than controls on a high-risk bet. At the same time, in contrast, a study involving hypothetical risk-taking showed that in general subjects were more willing to take the chance as probability of success went up; but that elated subjects were more daring than controls on a “long shot.” Differences in hypothetical vs real risk taking were noted, and the complexity (the interaction) of the influence of positive feelings on real risk taking was emphasized. The results were related to other research suggesting an influence of feeling states on cognitive processes and decision making.

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
期刊最新文献
Career transitions within organizations: An exploratory study of work, nonwork, and coping strategies Accountability to constituents: A two-edged sword A within-person test of the form of the expectancy theory model in a choice context A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions Perceived competence as a moderator of the relationship between role clarity and job performance: A test of two hypotheses
×
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