Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Iowa.
Department of Psychology, Appalachian State University.
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2023 Jan;152(1):45-59. doi: 10.1037/xge0001258. Epub 2022 Sep 1.
The refers to when people's expectations about an uncertain event are biased by outcome preferences. Prior work has provided limited evidence that the magnitude of this motivated bias depends on (is moderated by) how expectations are solicited-as discrete outcome predictions or as likelihood judgments expressed on more continuous scales. The present studies extended the generalizability and understanding of the moderating process. The authors proposed that solicitations of predictions and likelihood judgments have different connotations that ultimately affect how much bias is expressed; this varies from a prior account that attributed the moderation effect to response scale differences (dichotomous vs. continuous). Study 1 confirmed the connotation difference, with predictions being viewed as more affording of hunches. Studies 2-4 directly tested the moderation effect, and unlike prior work focusing on expectations for purely stochastic events, the present studies involved more naturalistic events for which likelihood information was not supplied or directly knowable. Before viewing scenes from a basketball game (Study 2) or an endurance race (Studies 3 and 4), participants were led to prefer one contestant over another. After viewing most of the closely fought contest, they made either a prediction or likelihood judgment about the outcome. Participants' tendency to forecast their preferred contestant to win was significantly stronger among those making predictions rather than likelihood judgments. In support of the proposed account, this effect persisted even when both types of solicitations offered only dichotomous response options. Broader implications for measuring and understanding people's expectations or forecasts are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
当人们对不确定事件的预期受到结果偏好的影响时，就会出现预测偏差。先前的研究已经提供了有限的证据表明，这种动机偏差的大小取决于（被调节）预期是如何被征求的——是离散的结果预测，还是在更连续的尺度上表达的可能性判断。本研究扩展了调节过程的普遍性和理解。作者提出，预测和可能性判断的征求方式有不同的含义，最终会影响表达的偏差程度；这与先前归因于响应尺度差异（二分法与连续法）的解释不同。研究 1 证实了这种内涵差异，预测被认为更能提供预感。研究 2-4 直接检验了调节效应，与先前专注于纯粹随机事件的期望的研究不同，本研究涉及更自然的事件，这些事件没有提供或直接可知的可能性信息。在观看篮球比赛（研究 2）或耐力比赛（研究 3 和 4）的场景之前，参与者被引导更喜欢一名参赛者而不是另一名。在观看了大部分激烈的比赛后，他们对结果做出了预测或可能性判断。在做出预测而不是可能性判断的参与者中，预测自己喜欢的参赛者获胜的倾向明显更强。为了支持所提出的解释，即使两种征求方式都只提供二分法的选择，这种效应仍然存在。还讨论了用于测量和理解人们的期望或预测的更广泛的意义。（PsycInfo 数据库记录（c）2023 APA，保留所有权利）。
