帮助 关于我们

返回检索结果

吃亏是福:择“值”选项而获真利
Suffering a Loss is a Blessing: Is It Real Gold or Fool’s Gold?

查看参考文献51篇

唐辉 1   周坤 2   赵翠霞 3   李纾 4 *  
文摘 主流决策理论认为人们当遵从个人利益最大化原则, 基于 “价 ” (value)做选择—— 挑选能直接给自己带来最大获益的选项。但决策者实际上经常会基于 “值 ” (worth)做选择—— 挑选令自己当下吃亏或损失的选项, 并认为 “值得 ”。为探索选择吃亏的选项究竟 “值 ”在何处, 研究1利用情境实验操纵 “基于 ‘值 ’选择 ”, 发现选择表面吃亏的 “值 ”选项反而能给个体带来更大的延迟获益。研究2a 采用归纳法, 确定了吃亏选项会在“惠、善、义、法 ”4个潜在维度上被决策者赋予更大的 “值 ”; 研究2b 利用测量4个潜在维度的情境测验, 以销售群体的销售绩效和主观幸福感为真实获益的衡量指标, 验证了 “ 基于‘值’选择 ” 与现实生活中的物质和精神获益间存在正向的线性预测关系。研究首次为中国文化中的 “吃亏是福 ”提供了实证证据的支持, 揭示诱使人们选择吃亏选项的是 “后福 ”—— 赋在潜在维度上的延迟获益。
其他语种文摘 In classical decision theory, choices are guided by the principle of value maximization, such that when offered a set of attributes or dimensions, a decision maker chooses the option with the highest value (value-based choice). In real life, however, people often choose options that will make them suffer a loss. To explain this behavior, Tang (2012) and Zheng (2012) proposed and demonstrated a so-called “worth-based choice” model, in which the decision maker chooses the option with the highest “worth” rather than the highest “value”. To explore what gives an option its worth, and to study the rationale underlying such a choice, we conducted two substudies, as described below.In Study 1, we created two scenarios - one in which a decision maker makes a “value-based choice” and the other in which a decision maker makes a “worth-based choice.” We recruited 134 subjects and assessed their responses to the two decision makers’ choices as a means of comparing the latent benefits associated with each type of choice. We found that decision makers who had suffered an offered loss when applying the “worth-based choice” would gain more in the long term by securing the good opinions of others. In contrast, decision makers who had maximized their immediate benefits by making a “value-based choice” would be subject to revenge or punishment later. These findings suggest that it is potential or deferred benefit that may lead people to make “worth-based choices”.Study 2 consisted of two substudies. The first study explored the underlying dimensions constantly considered by decision makers when assessing each option’s worth to make a “worth-based choice” (Study 2a).The second study examined the linear correlation between “worth-based choice” and real benefit (Study 2b) in a real-world setting. In Study 2a, a random sample of undergraduates and employees (N = 72) was surveyed to collect typical cases of “worth-based choices.” Exploratory factor analysis was then conducted with a random sample of 224 undergraduates and employees (aged between 18 and 60), and four factors (i.e., 惠(favor), 善(virtuous), 义(righteousness) and 法(law)) underlying “worth-based choice” were extracted. The four-factor construct was further proved to be reliable and valid by the results of a confirmatory factor analysis. In Study 2b,we used a sample of 178 salespersons in the real estate and pharmaceutical industries to compare the latent benefits generated by “value-based choice” and “worth-based choice”. The results confirmed our hypothesis that individuals who made a “worth-based choice” would gain more benefit later.We concluded that, in the “worth-based choice” model, though an individual may suffer an offered loss in the short term, he might gain more benefit in the long term. In the process, we managed to explain, for the first time, the philosophy reflected in a Chinese proverb, “chi kui shi fu” (suffering a loss is a blessing). The implications of the present study are also discussed.
来源 心理学报 ,2014,46(10):1549-1563 【核心库】
关键词 吃亏 ; 基于“值”选择 ; 基于“价”选择 ; 最大化原则
地址

1. 天津职业技术师范大学心理系, 中国科学院行为科学重点实验室, 天津, 300222  

2. 中国民航大学安全科学与工程学院, 天津, 300300  

3. 山东师范大学心理学院, 济南, 250038  

4. 中国科学院心理研究所, 中国科学院行为科学重点实验室, 北京, 100101

语种 中文
文献类型 研究性论文
ISSN 0439-755X
学科 社会科学总论
基金 天津市高校人文社会科学项目 ;  中国科学院知识创新工程重要方向项目 ;  国家自然科学基金项目 ;  国家教育部人文社会科学研究青年项目 ;  北京市优秀博士学位论文指导教师人文社科项目
文献收藏号 CSCD:5264517

参考文献 共 51 共3页

1.  Aknin L B. Prosocial spending and well-being: Cross-cultural evidence for a psychological universal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2013,104:635-652 被引 9 次    
2.  Aknin L B. Happiness runs in a circular motion: Evidence for a positive feedback loop between prosocial spending and happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies,2012,13:347-355 被引 10 次    
3.  Axelrod R. The evolution of cooperation. Science,1981,211:1390-1396 被引 105 次    
4.  Axelrod R. The evolution of cooperation,1984 被引 78 次    
5.  Bartlett M Y. Gratitude and prosocial behavior: Helping when it costs you. Psychological Science,2006,17:319-325 被引 17 次    
6.  Blau P M. Exchange and power in social life,1964 被引 120 次    
7.  Bordens K S. Research design and methods: A process approach,2006 被引 1 次    
8.  Boyd R. Coordinated punishment of defectors sustains cooperation and can proliferate when rare. Science,2010,328:617-620 被引 5 次    
9.  Bronfman N C. Trust, acceptance and knowledge of technological and environmental hazards in Chile. Journal of Risk Research,2008,11:755-773 被引 3 次    
10.  Chen X P. On the intricacies of the Chinese guanxi: A process model of guanxi development. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,2004,21:305-324 被引 12 次    
11.  Chen Y R. To whom do positive norm and negative norm of reciprocity apply?. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,2009,45:24-34 被引 5 次    
12.  Chiu C. The effect of personality and performance on reward allocation. Journal of Social Psychology,1988,128:279-280 被引 1 次    
13.  Chiu C. Hierarchical social relations and justice judgment among Hong Kong Chinese college students. Journal of Social Psychology,1991,131:885-887 被引 1 次    
14.  Cox J C. How to identify trust and reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior,2004,46:260-281 被引 6 次    
15.  Delamater J. Handbook of Social Psychology,2013 被引 1 次    
16.  Delton A W. Evolution of direct reciprocity under uncertainty can explain human generosity in one-shot encounters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,2011,108:13335-13340 被引 1 次    
17.  DeSteno D. Gratitude as moral sentiment:Emotion-guided cooperation in economic exchange. Emotion,2010,10:289-293 被引 10 次    
18.  Dunn E. Spending money on others promotes happiness. Science,2008,319:1687-1688 被引 1 次    
19.  Fehr E. Third party punishment and social norms. Evolution and Human Behavior,2004,25:63-87 被引 37 次    
20.  Fehr E. The nature of human altruism: Proximate patterns and evolutionary origins. Nature,2003,425:785-791 被引 50 次    
引证文献 6 篇

1 刘长江 利益冲突情境中社会行为的自动激活:合作还是利己? 心理科学进展,2016,24(12):1897-1906
被引 1 次

2 谈晨皓 名利博弈中的舍利取义行为 心理科学进展,2016,24(12):1907-1916
被引 0 次

显示所有6篇文献

论文科学数据集
PlumX Metrics
相关文献

 作者相关
 关键词相关
 参考文献相关

iAuthor 链接
李纾 0000-0003-4402-1674
版权所有 ©2008 中国科学院文献情报中心 制作维护：中国科学院文献情报中心
地址：北京中关村北四环西路33号 邮政编码：100190 联系电话：(010)82627496 E-mail:cscd@mail.las.ac.cn 京ICP备05002861号-4 | 京公网安备11010802043238号