• 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
Cognitive bias and how to improve sustainable decision making.认知偏差以及如何改善可持续决策
Front Psychol. 2023 Feb 28;14:1129835. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1129835. eCollection 2023.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Risk and Rationality in Adolescent Decision Making: Implications for Theory, Practice, and Public Policy.青少年决策中的风险与理性:对理论、实践和公共政策的启示。
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2006 Sep;7(1):1-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00026.x. Epub 2006 Sep 1.
4
Australia in 2030: what is our path to health for all?2030 年的澳大利亚:全民健康之路在何方?
Med J Aust. 2021 May;214 Suppl 8:S5-S40. doi: 10.5694/mja2.51020.
5
How debunking biases in research and development decisions could lead to more equitable healthcare?消除研发决策中的偏见如何能带来更公平的医疗保健?
Clin Transl Sci. 2024 Jul;17(7):e13880. doi: 10.1111/cts.13880.
6
Cognitive and implicit biases in nurses' judgment and decision-making: A scoping review.护士判断和决策中的认知和内隐偏见:范围综述。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2022 Sep;133:104284. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2022.104284. Epub 2022 May 24.
7
Conformist social learning leads to self-organised prevention against adverse bias in risky decision making.从众的社会学习导致了自我组织的预防措施,以避免在风险决策中出现不利偏见。
Elife. 2022 May 10;11:e75308. doi: 10.7554/eLife.75308.
8
Cooperation, Trust, and Antagonism: How Public Goods Are Promoted.合作、信任与对抗:公共物品如何得到促进。
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2013 Dec;14(3):119-65. doi: 10.1177/1529100612474436.
9
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
10
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.超越黑木树:影响澳大利亚地区、农村和偏远地区的健康研究问题的快速综述。
Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881.

引用本文的文献

1
Concorde Syndrome in the Treatment of People with Cancer: Validation of a Measurement Instrument.癌症患者治疗中的协和综合征:一种测量工具的验证
Int J Behav Med. 2025 Sep 17. doi: 10.1007/s12529-025-10392-9.
2
More sustainable choices in the workplace: a systematic review of nudge theory applications.工作场所中更具可持续性的选择:对助推理论应用的系统综述
Front Psychol. 2025 Aug 20;16:1556796. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1556796. eCollection 2025.
3
Neurosustainability: A Scoping Review on the Neuro-Cognitive Bases of Sustainable Decision-Making.神经可持续性:关于可持续决策的神经认知基础的范围综述。
Brain Sci. 2025 Jun 25;15(7):678. doi: 10.3390/brainsci15070678.
4
Overcoming heuristics that hinder people's acceptance of climate-change-mitigation technologies.克服阻碍人们接受气候变化缓解技术的启发式思维。
Front Psychol. 2025 Jun 18;16:1433280. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1433280. eCollection 2025.
5
Cognitive biases and contextual factors explaining variability in nurses' fall risk judgements: a multi-centre cross-sectional study.解释护士跌倒风险判断变异性的认知偏差和情境因素:一项多中心横断面研究。
Int J Nurs Stud Adv. 2025 May 28;8:100356. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnsa.2025.100356. eCollection 2025 Jun.
6
Psychological Factors That Contribute to the Use of Video Consultations in Health Care: Systematic Review.促成医疗保健中使用视频会诊的心理因素:系统评价
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Dec 11;26:e54636. doi: 10.2196/54636.
7
Impact of cognitive biases on environmental compliance risk perceptions in international construction projects.认知偏差对国际建设项目中环境合规风险认知的影响。
Front Psychol. 2024 Nov 21;15:1397306. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1397306. eCollection 2024.
8
Mitigating Cognitive Biases in Clinical Decision-Making Through Multi-Agent Conversations Using Large Language Models: Simulation Study.通过使用大型语言模型进行多代理对话来减轻临床决策中的认知偏差:模拟研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Nov 19;26:e59439. doi: 10.2196/59439.
9
Closed-Loop Therapy and Sleep in Young People Newly Diagnosed With T1D and Their Parents.新诊断为1型糖尿病的年轻人及其父母的闭环治疗与睡眠
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2024 Oct 14:19322968241286816. doi: 10.1177/19322968241286816.

本文引用的文献

1
Retention and Transfer of Cognitive Bias Mitigation Interventions: A Systematic Literature Study.认知偏差缓解干预措施的保留与迁移:一项系统文献研究
Front Psychol. 2021 Aug 12;12:629354. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.629354. eCollection 2021.
2
A Neural Network Framework for Cognitive Bias.一种用于认知偏差的神经网络框架。
Front Psychol. 2018 Sep 3;9:1561. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01561. eCollection 2018.
3
Navigating cognition biases in the search of sustainability.在寻找可持续性的过程中应对认知偏差。
Ambio. 2019 Jun;48(6):605-618. doi: 10.1007/s13280-018-1100-5. Epub 2018 Sep 14.
4
Sustainability. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet.可持续性。行星边界:在不断变化的星球上指导人类发展。
Science. 2015 Feb 13;347(6223):1259855. doi: 10.1126/science.1259855. Epub 2015 Jan 15.
5
Nudge politics: efficacy and ethics.助推政治:有效性与伦理道德
Front Psychol. 2013 Dec 19;4:972. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00972. eCollection 2013.
6
Common origins of diverse misconceptions: cognitive principles and the development of biology thinking.不同误解的共同起源:认知原则与生物学思维的发展。
CBE Life Sci Educ. 2012 Fall;11(3):209-15. doi: 10.1187/cbe.12-06-0074.
7
Science and government. Navigating the anthropocene: improving Earth system governance.科学与政府。应对人类世:改善地球系统治理。
Science. 2012 Mar 16;335(6074):1306-7. doi: 10.1126/science.1217255.
8
The dragons of inaction: psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation.不作为的巨龙:限制气候变化减缓和适应的心理障碍。
Am Psychol. 2011 May-Jun;66(4):290-302. doi: 10.1037/a0023566.
9
Psychology's contributions to understanding and addressing global climate change.心理学对理解和应对全球气候变化的贡献。
Am Psychol. 2011 May-Jun;66(4):241-50. doi: 10.1037/a0023220.
10
Heuristic decision making.启发式决策。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2011;62:451-82. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120709-145346.

认知偏差以及如何改善可持续决策

Cognitive bias and how to improve sustainable decision making.

作者信息

Korteling Johan E Hans, Paradies Geerte L, Sassen-van Meer Josephine P

机构信息

TNO Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research, The Hague, Netherlands.

出版信息

Front Psychol. 2023 Feb 28;14:1129835. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1129835. eCollection 2023.

DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1129835
PMID:37026083
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10071311/
Abstract

The rapid advances of science and technology have provided a large part of the world with all conceivable needs and comfort. However, this welfare comes with serious threats to the planet and many of its inhabitants. An enormous amount of scientific evidence points at global warming, mass destruction of bio-diversity, scarce resources, health risks, and pollution all over the world. These facts are generally acknowledged nowadays, not only by scientists, but also by the majority of politicians and citizens. Nevertheless, this understanding has caused insufficient changes in our decision making and behavior to preserve our natural resources and to prevent upcoming (natural) disasters. In the present study, we try to explain how systematic tendencies or distortions in human judgment and decision-making, known as "cognitive biases," contribute to this situation. A large body of literature shows how cognitive biases affect the outcome of our deliberations. In natural and primordial situations, they may lead to quick, practical, and satisfying decisions, but these decisions may be poor and risky in a broad range of modern, complex, and long-term challenges, like climate change or pandemic prevention. We first briefly present the social-psychological characteristics that are inherent to (or typical for) most sustainability issues. These are: experiential vagueness, long-term effects, complexity and uncertainty, threat of the status quo, threat of social status, personal vs. community interest, and group pressure. For each of these characteristics, we describe how this relates to cognitive biases, from a neuro-evolutionary point of view, and how these evolved biases may affect sustainable choices or behaviors of people. Finally, based on this knowledge, we describe influence techniques (interventions, nudges, incentives) to mitigate or capitalize on these biases in order to foster more sustainable choices and behaviors.

摘要

科学技术的飞速发展为世界上大部分地区提供了所有可以想象到的需求和舒适。然而,这种福祉伴随着对地球及其许多居民的严重威胁。大量科学证据表明全球变暖、生物多样性的大规模破坏、资源稀缺、健康风险以及世界各地的污染。如今,这些事实不仅得到科学家的普遍认可,也得到大多数政治家和公民的认可。然而,这种认识在我们的决策和行为中引发的变化不足以保护我们的自然资源并预防即将到来的(自然)灾害。在本研究中,我们试图解释被称为“认知偏差”的人类判断和决策中的系统倾向或扭曲是如何导致这种情况的。大量文献表明认知偏差如何影响我们思考的结果。在自然和原始情况下,它们可能会导致快速、实际且令人满意的决策,但在一系列现代、复杂和长期的挑战中,如气候变化或大流行预防,这些决策可能是糟糕且有风险的。我们首先简要介绍大多数可持续性问题所固有的(或典型的)社会心理特征。这些特征包括:经验模糊性、长期影响、复杂性和不确定性、现状威胁、社会地位威胁、个人利益与社区利益、以及群体压力。对于这些特征中的每一个,我们从神经进化的角度描述其与认知偏差的关系,以及这些进化而来的偏差可能如何影响人们的可持续选择或行为。最后,基于这些知识,我们描述了一些影响技术(干预、助推、激励),以减轻或利用这些偏差,从而促进更可持续的选择和行为。