• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

风险作为一种价值的跨情境有效性。

The cross-situational validity of risk as a value.

机构信息

Bowdoin College, 04011, Brunswick, Maine.

出版信息

Mem Cognit. 1974 May;2(3):497-500. doi: 10.3758/BF03196911.

DOI:10.3758/BF03196911
PMID:21274780
Abstract

Demand characteristics and risk are confounded on the choice dilemma items. Thus, it is difficult using that instrument to determine if individuals view themselves as more risky than others because of a cultural value of risk or instructional demand characteristics. The present study asked Ss to make judgments for themselves and for others on either the choice dilemmas (with risk-oriented or risk-neutral instructions) or on one of three other measures of risk taking (behavior prediction scale, risk of aversive consequences, zero expected value bets) which have exhibited the risky shift but do not have the instructional problems of the choice dilemmas. Only on the choice dilemmas did Ss view themselves as being more risky. On all other measures, Ss viewed themselves as either equal to or more conservative than others. These findings cast doubt on the validity of value type theories as general explanations for the risky shift.

摘要

在选择困境项目中,需求特征和风险是混杂在一起的。因此,很难使用这种工具来确定个体是否因为风险的文化价值观或指令性需求特征而认为自己比他人更具风险。本研究要求被试者在选择困境(带有风险导向或风险中性的指导语)或三种其他风险承担措施(行为预测量表、厌恶后果风险、零预期价值投注)上为自己和他人做出判断,这三种措施都表现出了风险转移,但没有选择困境的指导问题。只有在选择困境中,被试者才认为自己更具风险。在所有其他措施上,被试者认为自己与他人一样或比他人更保守。这些发现对价值类型理论作为风险转移的一般解释的有效性提出了质疑。

相似文献

1
The cross-situational validity of risk as a value.风险作为一种价值的跨情境有效性。
Mem Cognit. 1974 May;2(3):497-500. doi: 10.3758/BF03196911.
2
Are you more risk-seeking when helping others? Effects of situational urgency and peer presence on prosocial risky behavior.在帮助他人时你会更爱冒险吗?情境紧迫性和同伴在场对亲社会冒险行为的影响。
Front Psychol. 2023 Feb 27;14:1036624. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1036624. eCollection 2023.
3
Relationship of alcohol use and risky sexual behavior: a review and analysis of findings.饮酒与危险性行为的关系:研究结果综述与分析
J Adolesc Health. 1996 Nov;19(5):331-6. doi: 10.1016/S1054-139X(96)00024-9.
4
Developmental changes and individual differences in risk and perspective taking in adolescence.青少年时期风险认知与观点采择的发展变化及个体差异。
Dev Psychopathol. 2008 Fall;20(4):1213-29. doi: 10.1017/S0954579408000588.
5
Risk of Injury in Moral Dilemmas With Autonomous Vehicles.自动驾驶汽车面临的道德困境中的受伤风险。
Front Robot AI. 2021 Jan 20;7:572529. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2020.572529. eCollection 2020.
6
An experimental test of three choice shift hypotheses*.三种选择转移假设的实验检验*。
Mem Cognit. 1975 Mar;3(2):171-4. doi: 10.3758/BF03212894.
7
If all your friends jumped off a bridge: the effect of others' actions on engagement in and recommendation of risky behaviors.如果你的所有朋友都跳下桥:他人行为对参与和推荐危险行为的影响。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2015 Feb;144(1):12-7. doi: 10.1037/xge0000043. Epub 2014 Dec 8.
8
Toward a mental arithmetic process in risky choices.在风险选择中迈向心算过程。
Brain Cogn. 2013 Dec;83(3):307-14. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2013.09.009. Epub 2013 Oct 13.
9
Expectation and cooperation in prisoner's dilemmas: The moderating role of game riskiness.囚徒困境中的期望与合作:博弈风险的调节作用。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Apr;23(2):353-60. doi: 10.3758/s13423-015-0911-7.
10
[Failure effects and gender differences in perfectionism].[完美主义中的失败影响与性别差异]
Encephale. 2003 Mar-Apr;29(2):125-35.

本文引用的文献

1
GROUP DECISION MAKING UNDER RISK OF AVERSIVE CONSEQUENCES.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1965 May;1:453-60. doi: 10.1037/h0021803.
2
Group influence on individual risk taking.群体对个体冒险行为的影响。
J Abnorm Soc Psychol. 1962 Aug;65:75-86. doi: 10.1037/h0044376.
3
The risk hypothesis in predictive judgments of unethical behavior.
J Abnorm Soc Psychol. 1963 Mar;66:243-8. doi: 10.1037/h0040290.
4
Group discussion and predicted ethical risk taking.
小组讨论与预测的道德冒险行为。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1966 Jun;3(6):629-33. doi: 10.1037/h0023292.
5
Is risk a value?风险是一种价值吗?
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1968 May;9(1):101-106. doi: 10.1037/h0025719.
6
Group influence on ethical risk taking: the inadequacy of two hypotheses.
J Soc Psychol. 1970 Apr;80(2):237-8. doi: 10.1080/00224545.1970.9712548.