Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-28 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Research in the fields of financial investing, health, and organizational work has revealed that individuals are more likely to take risks when faced with stress. Prior studies have explained the underlying processes between stress and risk-taking from the perspectives of value appraisal, risk perception, and decision strategy. However, these studies were more akin to explore how people react more than why people react in risk-seeking ways under stress. Therefore, in order to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the association between stress and risk-seeking, this study aimed to reveal the direct and root reasons that explain an individual’s risk-taking behavior under stress and to clarify the internal mechanisms of this association. Several theories have suggested the reasons by which stress affects risk-seeking. For example, expected utility theory proposes that individuals tend to attach greater subjective value to the risk options in stressful situations. Prospect theory further suggests that stress affects both of the subjective value and subjective probability of risk options. These two theories consider cognitive changes as the possible reason that explains the “stress-risk-seeking” association. The dual-process theory further proposes that the said changes in the cognitive process are due to the depletion of cognitive resources under stress. Therefore, individuals tend to prefer labor-saving heuristic processing to adapt to the environment. The sensitive theory provides an explanation of the cognitive changes from an evolutionary perspective, suggesting that stress can unbalance individuals' psychological needs, crave higher rewards, and therefore, show more risk-seeking behaviors. The current study proposes that stress affects individuals’ value appraisal, risk perception and decision strategy through changes in cognitive resources and psychological needs. Specifically, on the one hand, stress occupies cognitive resources and weakens executive function, which is manifested in difficulties in suppressing dominant responses, slower task switching speed, and impaired working memory. On the other hand, stress unbalances individuals’ psychological needs and increases chances of reward-seeking, which is manifested in being more sensitive to high-reward options and positive reinforcement. Then, changes in executive function and psychological needs cause individuals to overestimate the positive outcomes of risky options and to reduce the perceived probability of negative outcomes and therefore, adopt heuristic strategies that consume less cognitive resources. Then, the heuristic strategies affect individuals’ risky behaviors through distorting their evaluations of risks, such as neglecting the possibility of negative outcomes and merely pursuing high-return options. In addition, our model accounts for boundary conditions in which the effects of stress on reward-seeking may differ by gender, materialism, and levels of stress coping; and the effects of stress on executive control may be moderated by factors such as age, stressors, social support, and domain specificity. Finally, we encourage future research to explore the association between stress and risk-seeking from three aspects. First, how would the dynamic changes of executive function under stress affect risk-seeking; Second, how does the interaction between cognition and emotion under stress affect risk-seeking; and Third, carry out intervention to regulate stress and reduce risk-taking behaviors.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-28 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Multiple dated outcomes in intertemporal choice involves the tradeoff of two or more outcomes at multiple time points, which has become the focus of research on intertemporal choice. According to the characteristics of the multiple dated intertemporal choice, this paper reviews the decision effects of multi-dated outcome on intertemporal choice, including: hidden zero effect, symbolic effect, extra dated money effect, front-end amount effect and sequence effect from the two-outcome and the sequence outcomes. In addition, the theoretical models such as the sequence model and the trade-off model to explain the above decision effects are explained. Finally, the paper points out the future research direction: the follow-up research should strengthen the discussion on the field of mixed gain-loss intertemporal choice, and further explore the mechanism of multiple dated intertemporal choice process by using the decision-making process tracking technology.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-28 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Many decisions that lead to neither pure gains nor losses require a trade-off between gains and losses over time. This kind of intertemporal choice featuring mixed gains and losses is increasingly common. Notably, such choices have important theoretical and practical value and have attracted increasing attention from researchers. Prior studies have usually employed a theoretical framework focused on intertemporal choice in the context of pure gains or losses, thereby failing to make use of any theoretical construction and exploration concerning the decision-making process that is suitable for mixed intertemporal choices.To answer the key question of "how does motivational conflict affect mixed intertemporal choice", this paper intends to explore the following specific research questions. (1) What kind of motivational conflict occurs in the context of mixed intertemporal choice? (2) How does motivational conflict affect individual decision preferences in the context of mixed intertemporal choice? (3) What is the mechanism underlying motivational conflict that affects individual decision-making preferences in the context of mixed intertemporal choice?For this purpose, we plan to explore the mechanism of motivation conflict underlying the decision-making process systematically by using both behavioural experiments and mouse-tracking techniques, and we expect to carry out three studies including six experiments in total. Specific details are as follows. (1) In Study 1, the relationship between the degree of motivation conflict and behavioural preferences in the context of such intertemporal choice is investigated. First, we initially propose using a within-subject experimental design to examine the relationship between decision-preference conflict and choice preference with respect to a mixed intertemporal choice step-preference paradigm. Simultaneously, a repeated measurement within-subject experimental design will be used to expand our research results pertaining to individual self-rated motivation conflict and to test the relationship between motivation conflict and mixed intertemporal choice in further detail. Study 1 will lay a paradigmatic foundation for decision-making research in subsequent Studies 2 and 3. (2) In Study 2, the degree of decision-making conflict will be manipulated by altering the relative differences in gains and losses with respect to endogenous factors as well as the resource limitations of exogenous factors. This approach is intended to verify the causal chain linking the degree of decision-making conflict to behavioural preference in further detail. (3) In Study 3, the decision-making process index and mouse tracking technology will be used to explore the process mechanism underlying the influence of mixed intertemporal choice conflict on behavioural preference. The degree of decision conflict will be measured by reference to the mouse trajectory index to reveal the process characteristics of decision conflict and the way in which this factor affects behavioural preference.In conclusion, this study will explore the dynamic decision-making process mechanism associated with a mixed intertemporal choice context of decision conflict from the perspective of motivation conflict and thereby contribute to research and theory construction concerning mixed intertemporal choice. On the one hand, a theoretical interpretation of the decision-making process mechanism that advances mixed intertemporal choice will be produced by exploring the impact of decision-making motivational conflicts on mixed intertemporal choice. On the other hand, we try to reveal the motivation underlying the choice preference rule in the context of mixed intertemporal choice based on the theoretical perspective of motivation conflict, including avoidance, which serves as a response to calls by previous researchers for the improvement of our understanding of mixed intertemporal choice. Moreover, this study will not only attempt to highlight the relationship between intermotivational conflict and choice preference in the context of mixed intertemporal choice but also to distinguish the factors that influence motivational conflict in the context of mixed intertemporal choice further by identifying them as either exogenous or endogenous factors. Specifically, this study will systematically manipulate exogenous factors and endogenous factors to enhance approach or avoidance motivation and subsequently change the degree of motivation conflict in an attempt to depict the causal chain associated with motivation conflict and mixed cross-period decision-making choice preference in full depth. By reference to the findings concerning the degree of decision conflict, the preference rule and the decision-making process in the context of mixed intertemporal choice, suggestions for the design of organizational management measures and the improvement of both individual and organizational welfare will be provided.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： Vaccines are crucial for controlling deadly diseases, and how to persuade people to get vaccinated has become a hot topic in enhancing public health benefits. One way to increase the vaccination rate is to raise public awareness of the importance of vaccines through advertising. As an effective and cost-friendly approach, goal framing has been widely used in vaccine advertising. However, the literature has mixed findings about whether positive or negative goal framing is more effective in persuading people to get vaccinated. The present study aims to investigate how temporal distance (present vs. future) interacts with different types of goal framing (positive vs. negative) in persuading people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. We hypothesized that negative goal framing is more persuasive when the advertising focuses on present outcomes, while positive goal framing is more effective when combined with future-focused outcomes. We further hypothesized that the inner mechanism is the intertemporal asymmetry of approach and avoidance motivation. More specifically, the avoidance motivation induced by a negative frame is stronger in the present, while the approach motivation induced by a positive frame is stronger in the future. The perceived risk of COVID-19 moderated this effect. Four studies were conducted to examine our hypotheses. Study 1 was conducted to preliminarily investigate how goal framing and temporal distance jointly influence willingness to get the COVID-19 vaccine. The aim of Study 2 was to verify the mediating effect of approach and avoidance motivation in a different advertising setting, as well as to rule out the potential mediators of the construal level and positive/negative emotions. In Study 3, we further tested the mediators by manipulating participants’ approach and avoidance motivation. Study 4 was a quasi-experiment in which we recruited participants from areas with different levels of COVID-19 risk to test how perceived risk moderated the interaction effect of goal framing and temporal distance. The results showed that a negative goal frame was more persuasive when combined with present-focused advertising, while a positive goal frame was more effective when combined with future-focused advertising (Study 1, N = 363). Avoidance motivation mediated the relationship between the goal frame and vaccine uptake in the present context, while approach motivation mediated the relationship between the goal frame and vaccine uptake in the future context (Study 2, N = 292). The results in Study 3 (N = 347) revealed that approach motivation priming increases the persuasiveness of the present-positive frame, while avoidance motivation priming increases the persuasiveness of the future-negative frame. COVID-19 risk also had an impact on the relationship between goal framing and temporal distance on vaccine uptake. When the COVID-19 risk was high, the difference in vaccine uptake between present-positive and present-negative conditions disappeared, while the future-positive frame was still more persuasive than the future-negative frame (Study 4, N = 423). In conclusion, the present study found an interactive effect of goal framing and temporal distance in persuading people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Avoidance/approach motivation mediates the relationship between goal framing and vaccine uptake in the present/future temporal context. The perceived COVID risk further moderated the interaction effect. The present study contributes to both the framing and approach- avoidance motivation literature and sheds light on future practices in persuading people to get the COVID vaccine and promoting the uptake of other vaccines.
Subjects: Psychology >> Management Psychology submitted time 2022-07-04
Abstract：
Based on an approach-avoidance motivation conflict perspective, this proposal systematically explores the decision-making mechanism associated with mixed gain-loss intertemporal choice by using behavioural experiments and mouse tracking technology. In Study 1, the relationship between the degree of motivation conflict and behavioural preferences in the context of such intertemporal choice is investigated. In Study 2, both endogenous factors (the relative difference between the amount of gain and the amount of loss) and exogenous factors (limited external resources) are manipulated to reveal the causal chain linking the degree of motivation conflict to mixed intertemporal choice. In Study 3, mouse tracking technology is used to explore the mechanism by which motivation conflict associated with mixed intertemporal choice influences behavioural preferences. The results of these studies reveal the mechanism by which motivational conflict affects the mixed intertemporal choice process and can also provide a theoretical foundation for the design of relevant schemes in organizational management.
Peer Review Status:
Awaiting Review
Subjects: Psychology >> Management Psychology submitted time 2022-05-19
Abstract：
Vaccines are crucial for controlling deadly diseases, and how to persuade people to get vaccinated has become a hot topic in enhancing public health benefits. One way to increase the vaccination rate is to raise public awareness of the importance of vaccines through advertising. As an effective and cost-friendly approach, goal framing has been widely used in vaccine advertising. However, the literature has mixed findings about whether positive or negative goal framing is more effective in persuading people to get vaccinated. The present study aims to investigate how temporal distance (present vs. future) interacts with different types of goal framing (positive vs. negative) in persuading people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. We hypothesized that negative goal framing is more persuasive when the advertisingfocuses on present outcomes, while positive goal framing is more effective when combined with future-focused outcomes. We further hypothesized that the inner mechanism is the intertemporal asymmetry of approach and avoidance motivation. More specifically, the avoidance motivation induced by a negative frame is stronger in the present, while the approach motivation induced by a positive frame is stronger in the future. The perceived risk of COVID-19 moderated this effect.
Four studies were conducted to examine our hypotheses. Study 1 was conducted to preliminarily investigate how goal framing and temporal distance jointly influence willingness to get the COVID-19 vaccine. The aim of Study 2 was to verify the mediating effect of approach and avoidance motivation in a different advertising setting, as well as to rule out the potential mediators of the construal level and positive/negative emotions. In Study 3, we further tested the mediators by manipulating participants’ approach and avoidance motivation. Study 4 was a quasi-experiment in which we recruited participants from areas with different levels of COVID-19 risk to test how perceived risk moderated the interaction effect of goal framing and temporal distance.
The results showed that a negative goal frame was more persuasive when combined with present-focused advertising, while a positive goal frame was more effective when combined with future-focused advertising (Study 1, N = 363). Avoidance motivation mediated the relationship between the goal frame and vaccine uptake in the present context, while approach motivation mediated the relationship between the goal frame and vaccine uptake in the future context (Study 2, N = 292). The results in Study 3 (N = 347) revealed that approach motivation priming increases the persuasiveness of the present-positive frame, while avoidance motivation priming increases the persuasiveness of the future-negative frame. COVID-19 risk also had an impact on the relationship between goal framing and temporal distance on vaccine uptake. When the COVID-19 risk was high, the difference in vaccine uptake between present-positive and present-negative conditions disappeared, while the future-positive frame was still more persuasive than the future-negative frame (Study 4, N = 423).
In conclusion, the present study found an interactive effect of goal framing and temporal distance in persuading people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Avoidance/approach motivation mediates the relationship between goal framing and vaccine uptake in the present/future temporal context. The perceived COVID risk further moderated the interaction effect. The present study contributes to both the framing and approach-avoidance motivation literature and sheds light on future practices in persuading people to get the COVIDvaccine and promoting the uptake of other vaccines.
"
Peer Review Status:Awaiting Review
Hits
Hits
Downloads
Comment