Emotion. 2016 Dec;16(8):1185. doi: 10.1037/emo0000255.
Reports an error in "Incidental fear cues increase monetary loss aversion" by Stefan Schulreich, Holger Gerhardt and Hauke R. Heekeren (, 2016[Apr], Vol 16[3], 402-412). In the current article, there was an error in the Study 2 portion of the article. The fourth paragraph of the Results section should read as follows: Performing the same analyses as in Study 1, we found an effect of incidental fear cues on decision behavior. Participants accepted fewer gambles in the fearful-face condition (32.77%) than in the neutral-face condition (33.96%), with Z = -2.187, p = .027, d = -0.998 in the Wilcoxon signed-ranks test and β = 0.012, SE = 0.0053, F(1, 21) = 4.434, p = .047, partial η² = .174 in the linear regression. This suggests increased risk aversion in the fearful-face condition. Concerning personality, however, there were no significant between-subjects effects or between-within interaction effects (all ps = .349). (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2015-52358-001.) In many everyday decisions, people exhibit loss aversion-a greater sensitivity to losses relative to gains of equal size. Loss aversion is thought to be (at least partly) mediated by emotional-in particular, fear-related-processes. Decision research has shown that even incidental emotions, which are unrelated to the decision at hand, can influence decision making. The effect of incidental fear on loss aversion, however, is thus far unclear. In two studies, we experimentally investigated how incidental fear cues, presented during (Study 1) or before (Study 2) choices to accept or reject mixed gambles over real monetary stakes, influence monetary loss aversion. We find that the presentation of fearful faces, relative to the presentation of neutral faces, increased risk aversion-an effect that could be attributed to increased loss aversion. The size of this effect was moderated by psychopathic personality: Fearless dominance, in particular its interpersonal facet, but not self-centered impulsivity, attenuated the effect of incidental fear cues on loss aversion, consistent with reduced fear reactivity. Together, these results highlight the sensitivity of loss aversion to the affective context. (PsycINFO Database Record
报告了 Stefan Schulreich、Holger Gerhardt 和 Hauke R. Heekeren 的“偶然恐惧线索增加金钱损失厌恶”（，2016[4 月]，第 16 卷[3]，第 402-412 页）中的错误。在当前文章中，文章的研究 2 部分存在错误。结果部分的第四段应改为：与研究 1 相同，我们在决策行为中发现了偶然恐惧线索的影响。与中性面孔条件（33.96%）相比，参与者在恐惧面孔条件下接受的赌博更少（32.77%），Z=-2.187，p=0.027，d=-0.998 在 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验中，β=0.012，SE=0.0053，F（1,21）=4.434，p=0.047，部分η²=0.174 在线性回归中。这表明在恐惧面孔条件下风险规避增加。然而，关于个性，没有显著的被试间效应或被试内-间效应（所有 p=0.349）。（原始文章的以下摘要出现在记录 2015-52358-001 中。）在许多日常决策中，人们表现出损失厌恶——对损失的敏感性大于同等大小的收益。损失厌恶被认为（至少部分）是由情绪引起的——尤其是与恐惧相关的过程。决策研究表明，即使是与手头决策无关的偶然情绪也会影响决策。然而，偶然恐惧对损失厌恶的影响尚不清楚。在两项研究中，我们实验研究了在接受或拒绝混合赌博（涉及真实货币赌注）时呈现的偶然恐惧线索（研究 1）或之前（研究 2）呈现的偶然恐惧线索如何影响金钱损失厌恶。我们发现，与呈现中性面孔相比，呈现恐惧面孔会增加风险规避——这种效应可以归因于损失厌恶增加。这种效应的大小受到精神病态人格的调节：无畏支配，特别是其人际方面，但不是自我中心的冲动，减轻了偶然恐惧线索对损失厌恶的影响，这与恐惧反应降低一致。总之，这些结果强调了损失厌恶对情感背景的敏感性。
