J Appl Psychol. 2017 Feb;102(2):235. doi: 10.1037/apl0000198.
Reports an error in "An integrative formal model of motivation and decision making: The MGPM*" by Timothy Ballard, Gillian Yeo, Shayne Loft, Jeffrey B. Vancouver and Andrew Neal (, 2016[Sep], Vol 101[9], 1240-1265). Equation A3 contained an error. This correct equation is provided in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2016-28692-001.) We develop and test an integrative formal model of motivation and decision making. The model, referred to as the extended multiple-goal pursuit model (MGPM*), is an integration of the multiple-goal pursuit model (Vancouver, Weinhardt, & Schmidt, 2010) and decision field theory (Busemeyer & Townsend, 1993). Simulations of the model generated predictions regarding the effects of goal type (approach vs. avoidance), risk, and time sensitivity on prioritization. We tested these predictions in an experiment in which participants pursued different combinations of approach and avoidance goals under different levels of risk. The empirical results were consistent with the predictions of the MGPM*. Specifically, participants pursuing 1 approach and 1 avoidance goal shifted priority from the approach to the avoidance goal over time. Among participants pursuing 2 approach goals, those with low time sensitivity prioritized the goal with the larger discrepancy, whereas those with high time sensitivity prioritized the goal with the smaller discrepancy. Participants pursuing 2 avoidance goals generally prioritized the goal with the smaller discrepancy. Finally, all of these effects became weaker as the level of risk increased. We used quantitative model comparison to show that the MGPM* explained the data better than the original multiple-goal pursuit model, and that the major extensions from the original model were justified. The MGPM* represents a step forward in the development of a general theory of decision making during multiple-goal pursuit. (PsycINFO Database Record
报告“动机与决策的综合形式模型：MGPM*”（ Timothy Ballard、Gillian Yeo、Shayne Loft、Jeffrey B. Vancouver 和 Andrew Neal 著）中的错误。2016 年 9 月，第 101 卷，第 1240-1265 页。公式 A3 有误。该错误公式在勘误中给出。（原始文章摘要如下）我们开发并测试了动机与决策的综合形式模型。该模型被称为扩展的多目标追求模型（MGPM*），是多目标追求模型（Vancouver、Weinhardt 和 Schmidt，2010）和决策场理论（Busemeyer 和 Townsend，1993）的综合。模型的模拟产生了关于目标类型（接近与回避）、风险和时间敏感性对优先级的影响的预测。我们在一项实验中检验了这些预测，参与者在不同的风险水平下追求不同的接近和回避目标组合。实证结果与 MGPM的预测一致。具体来说，追求 1 个接近和 1 个回避目标的参与者随着时间的推移，会将优先级从接近目标转移到回避目标。在追求 2 个接近目标的参与者中，时间敏感性低的参与者会优先考虑差异较大的目标，而时间敏感性高的参与者会优先考虑差异较小的目标。追求 2 个回避目标的参与者通常会优先考虑差异较小的目标。最后，随着风险水平的增加，所有这些效应都变得较弱。我们使用定量模型比较表明，MGPM比原始的多目标追求模型更好地解释了数据，并且原始模型的主要扩展是合理的。MGPM*是在多目标追求过程中发展通用决策理论方面的一个进步。
