• 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

相似文献

1
Framing effects are robust to linguistic disambiguation: A critical test of contemporary theory.框架效应对于语言歧义具有稳健性:当代理论的一项关键检验。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2016 Feb;42(2):238-56. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000158. Epub 2015 Sep 7.
2
Framing effects and risk-sensitive decision making.框架效应与风险敏感决策。
Br J Psychol. 2012 Feb;103(1):83-97. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02047.x. Epub 2011 Jun 15.
3
Explaining risky choices with judgments: Framing, the zero effect, and the contextual relativity of gist.用判断解释风险选择:框架效应、零效应和主旨的语境相对性。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2021 Jul;47(7):1037-1053. doi: 10.1037/xlm0001016. Epub 2021 Apr 29.
4
Neurobiological and memory models of risky decision making in adolescents versus young adults.青少年与年轻成年人冒险决策的神经生物学和记忆模型。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2011 Sep;37(5):1125-42. doi: 10.1037/a0023943.
5
Risky decision making across three arenas of choice: are younger and older adults differently susceptible to framing effects?跨三个选择领域的风险决策:年轻人和老年人对框架效应的易感性是否不同?
J Gen Psychol. 2005 Jan;132(1):81-92. doi: 10.3200/GENP.132.1.81-93.
6
Age, Loss Minimization, and the Role of Probability for Decision-Making.年龄、损失最小化和概率在决策中的作用。
Gerontology. 2018;64(5):475-484. doi: 10.1159/000487636. Epub 2018 Apr 5.
7
Role of Emotion and Cognition on Age Differences in the Framing Effect.情绪与认知在框架效应年龄差异中的作用
Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2017 Sep;85(3):305-325. doi: 10.1177/0091415017691284. Epub 2017 Feb 19.
8
The order of information processing alters economic gain-loss framing effects.信息处理的顺序会改变经济得失框架效应。
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2018 Jan;182:46-54. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.11.013. Epub 2017 Nov 11.
9
Applying fuzzy-trace theory to attribute-framing bias: Gist and verbatim representations of quantitative information.应用模糊痕迹理论研究属性框架偏差:定量信息的要点和逐字表达。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2020 Mar;46(3):497-506. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000741. Epub 2019 Jul 8.
10
Thinking Fast Increases Framing Effects in Risky Decision Making.快速思考会增加风险决策中的框架效应。
Psychol Sci. 2017 Apr;28(4):530-543. doi: 10.1177/0956797616689092. Epub 2017 Feb 1.

引用本文的文献

1
Protective behaviors during COVID-19 confinement measures in Greece: the role of anxiety, perceived risk and risky-choice framing.希腊新冠疫情封锁措施期间的保护行为:焦虑、感知风险和风险选择框架的作用
AIMS Public Health. 2023 Apr 25;10(2):281-296. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2023021. eCollection 2023.
2
Critical tests of fuzzy trace theory in brain and behavior: uncertainty across time, probability, and development.模糊痕迹理论在大脑和行为中的关键测试:时间、概率和发展上的不确定性。
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2023 Jun;23(3):746-772. doi: 10.3758/s13415-022-01058-0. Epub 2023 Feb 24.
3
A reassessment of the Resistance to Framing scale.对框架阻力量表的重新评估。
Behav Res Methods. 2023 Aug;55(5):2320-2332. doi: 10.3758/s13428-022-01876-7. Epub 2022 Jul 18.
4
Viruses, Vaccines, and COVID-19: Explaining and Improving Risky Decision-making.病毒、疫苗与新冠疫情:解释并改善风险决策
J Appl Res Mem Cogn. 2021 Dec;10(4):491-509. doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2021.08.004. Epub 2021 Dec 13.
5
Explaining risky choices with judgments: Framing, the zero effect, and the contextual relativity of gist.用判断解释风险选择:框架效应、零效应和主旨的语境相对性。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2021 Jul;47(7):1037-1053. doi: 10.1037/xlm0001016. Epub 2021 Apr 29.
6
A formal model of fuzzy-trace theory: Variations on framing effects and the Allais paradox.模糊痕迹理论的形式模型:框架效应和阿莱悖论的变体
Decision (Wash D C ). 2018 Oct;5(4):205-252. doi: 10.1037/dec0000083. Epub 2017 May 29.
7
Cognitive Style and Frame Susceptibility in Decision-Making.决策中的认知风格与框架易感性
Front Psychol. 2018 Aug 10;9:1461. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01461. eCollection 2018.
8
Brain activation covaries with reported criminal behaviors when making risky choices: A fuzzy-trace theory approach.当做出风险选择时,大脑激活与报告的犯罪行为相关:模糊痕迹理论方法。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2018 Jul;147(7):1094-1109. doi: 10.1037/xge0000434.
9
How Reasoning, Judgment, and Decision Making are Colored by Gist-based Intuition: A Fuzzy-Trace Theory Approach.基于要点的直觉如何影响推理、判断和决策:一种模糊痕迹理论方法。
J Appl Res Mem Cogn. 2015 Dec 1;4(4):344-355. doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2015.09.001.

本文引用的文献

1
An Overview of Judgment and Decision Making Research Through the Lens of Fuzzy Trace Theory.从模糊痕迹理论视角看判断与决策研究综述
Xin Li Ke Xue Jin Zhan. 2014 Dec;22(12):1837-1854. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2014.01837.
2
A new intuitionism: Meaning, memory, and development in Fuzzy-Trace Theory.一种新的直觉主义:模糊痕迹理论中的意义、记忆与发展
Judgm Decis Mak. 2012 May;7(3):332-359.
3
Basic mechanisms of numerical processing: cross-modal number comparisons and symbolic versus nonsymbolic numerosity in the intraparietal sulcus.数字处理的基本机制:跨模态数字比较以及顶内沟中的符号与非符号数量表征
J Neurosci. 2014 Jan 29;34(5):1567-9. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4771-13.2014.
4
Developmental reversals in risky decision making: intelligence agents show larger decision biases than college students.风险决策中的发展性逆转:情报人员比大学生表现出更大的决策偏差。
Psychol Sci. 2014 Jan;25(1):76-84. doi: 10.1177/0956797613497022. Epub 2013 Oct 30.
5
Do framing effects reveal irrational choice?框架效应是否揭示了非理性选择?
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2014 Jun;143(3):1185-98. doi: 10.1037/a0034207. Epub 2013 Aug 26.
6
Dual Processes in Decision Making and Developmental Neuroscience: A Fuzzy-Trace Model.决策与发展神经科学中的双重加工:一种模糊痕迹模型。
Dev Rev. 2011 Sep;31(2-3):180-206. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2011.07.004.
7
Decision-making under risk in children, adolescents, and young adults.儿童、青少年和青年在风险下的决策。
Front Psychol. 2011 Apr 18;2:72. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00072. eCollection 2011.
8
Clinical gist and medical education: connecting the dots.临床要点与医学教育:融会贯通。
JAMA. 2009 Sep 23;302(12):1332-3. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1383.
9
Information leakage from logically equivalent frames.来自逻辑等效帧的信息泄露。
Cognition. 2006 Oct;101(3):467-94. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.11.001. Epub 2005 Dec 20.
10
A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality.关于判断与选择的一种视角:描绘有限理性
Am Psychol. 2003 Sep;58(9):697-720. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.9.697.

框架效应对于语言歧义具有稳健性:当代理论的一项关键检验。

Framing effects are robust to linguistic disambiguation: A critical test of contemporary theory.

作者信息

Chick Christina F, Reyna Valerie F, Corbin Jonathan C

机构信息

Department of Human Development, Human Neuroscience Institute, Cornell University.

Department of Human Development, Cornell University.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2016 Feb;42(2):238-56. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000158. Epub 2015 Sep 7.

DOI:10.1037/xlm0000158
PMID:26348200
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4738018/
Abstract

Theoretical accounts of risky choice framing effects assume that decision makers interpret framing options as extensionally equivalent, such that if 600 lives are at stake, saving 200 implies that 400 die. However, many scholars have argued that framing effects are caused, instead, by filling in pragmatically implied information. This linguistic ambiguity hypothesis is grounded in neo-Gricean pragmatics, information leakage, and schema theory. In 2 experiments, we conducted critical tests of the linguistic ambiguity hypothesis and its relation to framing. We controlled for this crucial implied information by disambiguating it using instructions and detailed examples, followed by multiple quizzes. After disambiguating missing information, we presented standard framing problems plus truncated versions, varying types of missing information. Truncations were also critical tests of prospect theory and fuzzy trace theory. Participants were not only college students, but also middle-age adults (who showed similar results). Contrary to the ambiguity hypothesis, participants who interpreted missing information as complementary to stated information nonetheless showed robust framing effects. Although adding words like "at least" can change interpretations of framing information, this form of linguistic ambiguity is not necessary to observe risky choice framing effects.

摘要

风险选择框架效应的理论解释假定,决策者将框架选项解释为外延等价,即如果600人的生命受到威胁,拯救200人意味着400人死亡。然而,许多学者认为,框架效应相反是由填充语用隐含信息导致的。这种语言模糊性假设基于新格赖斯语用学、信息泄露和图式理论。在两项实验中,我们对语言模糊性假设及其与框架的关系进行了关键测试。我们通过使用说明和详细示例消除其歧义,随后进行多次测验,来控制这种关键的隐含信息。在消除缺失信息的歧义后,我们呈现了标准框架问题以及截断版本,改变缺失信息的类型。截断也是对前景理论和模糊痕迹理论的关键测试。参与者不仅有大学生,还有中年成年人(他们表现出相似的结果)。与模糊性假设相反,那些将缺失信息解释为与陈述信息互补的参与者仍然表现出强烈的框架效应。虽然添加“至少”这样的词可以改变对框架信息的解释,但这种语言模糊形式对于观察风险选择框架效应并非必要。