论文部分内容阅读
两项实验研究对新近提出的风险决策的三参照点(TRP)理论进行了验证。实验就大学生对就业的薪酬制度的偏好和选择对三参照点理论的独特推断进行了检验。三参照点理论强调决策参照点对预期结果分布的界定作用。人们在决策时不仅会考虑现状(SQ)还会考虑最低要求(MR)和目标(G)。MR,SQ和G三个参照点把结果空间分成了四个功能区域:成功、获益、损失和失败。根据三参照点理论,参照点的心理效应为MR>G>SQ。当预期结果的平均值低于MR(或者G)的时候,人们会偏好风险高的选择以增加达到或者超过参照点的可能性;而当预期结果的平均值高于MR(或者G)的时候,人们会偏好风险低的选择以减少低于MR(或者G)的可能性。实验1中,根据预先测定的大学生群体对第一份工资的最低要求,准确地预测了参与者在高稳定型、高弹性型和中间型三种工资类型的风险偏好和取舍。实验2进一步探讨了MR和G之间的权衡:实验发现当弹性型工资的浮动范围双向超出MR和G(而不是双向非临界)时,人们会优先考虑MR从而使超过G的可能性的吸引力相对降低;而不会为了追求达到G而忽略低于MR的风险。
Two experimental studies validated the recently proposed three-point-of-view (TRP) theory for risk decision making. The experiment tests the preference and choice of college students on the pay system of employment to test the unique inference of the three reference points theory. The three reference point theory emphasizes the defining role of decision reference point on the distribution of expected results. People take into account not only the status quo (SQ), but also the minimum requirements (MR) and goals (G) in their decision making. The three reference points MR, SQ, and G divide the result space into four functional areas: success, gain, loss, and failure. According to the three reference point theory, the psychological effect of the reference point is MR> G> SQ. When the average of the expected outcomes is lower than MR (or G), people will prefer risky choices to increase the likelihood of reaching or exceeding the reference point; and when the average of the expected outcomes is higher than MR (or G) , People will prefer low-risk options to reduce the likelihood of being lower than MR (or G). In Experiment 1, based on the pre-determined minimum wage of the first group of college students, the participants’ risk preferences and trade-offs in three types of high-stable, high-elasticity and intermediate-type wage were accurately predicted. Experiment 2 further explores the trade-off between MR and G: It has been found experimentally that when the floating range of elastic wage exceeds MR and G bidirectionally (rather than bi-directionally non-critical), one tends to give priority to MR to attract the possibility of exceeding G Relatively lower force; and not in pursuit of reaching G while ignoring the risk of lower than MR.