全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

高中生选科中自我决策与向他人建议的差异:责任感的中介作用
Differences in Self-Selection and Recommendations to Others in High School Students’ Subject Choices: The Mediating Role of Responsibility

DOI: 10.12677/ap.2024.147473, PP. 228-236

Keywords: 新高考改革,为自我选科,向他人建议选科,责任感,社会距离
New College Entrance Examination Reform
, Self-Selecting Subjects, Recommending Subjects to Others, Sense of Responsibility, Social Distance

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

本研究旨在探讨新高考改革选科中高中生为自己选科与向他人建议选科之间的差异,以及这一差异所产生的潜在心理机制。研究结果显示:个体在为自我选科和向朋友建议选科时不存在选择偏好差异,都偏好于选择难度较低但兴趣也较低的科目;然而,向陌生人建议选科时则偏好于选择兴趣较高但难度也较高的科目。而且,责任感在决策者角色和科目选择偏好之间起到部分中介作用:与为自己选科相比,向陌生人建议选科时个体感知到的责任感相对较低,因而导致其更偏好于向他人建议选择兴趣较高但难度也较高的科目。这些发现深化了对自我决策与向他人建议之间差异的理解,也为学生的高考选科以及家长和老师的建议选科提供了有价值的参考。
This study aims to explore the differences between high school students’ self-selection of subjects and their recommendations to others in the context of the new college entrance examination reform, as well as the underlying psychological mechanisms of these differences. The results indicate that individuals do not exhibit preference differences between selecting subjects for themselves and recommending subjects to friends; they tend to prefer subjects with lower difficulty and lower interest in both scenarios. However, when advising strangers, individuals tend to prefer subjects with higher interest but also higher difficulty. Furthermore, a partial mediating effect of responsibility was found between decision-maker roles and subject choice preferences: compared to self-selection, individuals perceive lower responsibility when advising strangers, leading to a greater preference for recommending subjects with higher interest but also higher difficulty. These findings deepen our understanding of the differences between self-selection and recommendations to others and provide valuable insights for students’ subject selection in the college entrance examination, as well as for parental and teacher guidance.

References

[1]  边新灿, 蒋丽君, 雷炜(2017). 论新高考改革的价值取向与两难抉择. 中国高教研究, (4), 61-65.
[2]  方淦, 许可, 黄瑾(2022). 新高考改革的理想选择、现实困境与未来走向. 考试研究, (5), 54-61.
[3]  方杰, 温忠麟, 张敏强(2017). 类别变量的中介效应分析. 心理科学, 40(2), 471-477.
[4]  何伊丽(2015). 动机分析新视角: 调节聚焦理论. 东莞理工学院学报, 22(4), 18-22.
[5]  秦川(2021). 新高考下的选科变革与应对. 考试研究, (3), 24-29.
[6]  苏红(2018). 对浙沪高考改革试点后中学“选课走班”的调查与思考. 教育测量与评价, (5), 25-30.
[7]  隋丽君(2020). 新高考背景下高中生选科调查与思考——以山东省2017级学生为例. 考试研究, 16(5), 46-56.
[8]  张湘一, 韩梦琳, 周灿, 陈锡友, 丁道群(2022). 高中生选科的自我-他人决策差异: 预期内疚的作用. 心理科学, 45(3), 635-642.
[9]  张雨强, 顾慧, 张中宁(2018). 普通高中生高考选考科目现状及影响因素研究——以浙江省5所高中首批选考学生为例. 教育学报, 14(4), 29-38.
[10]  竺丽英, 王祖浩, 全微雷(2019). 高中生新高考科目选择行为的影响因素分析——基于NVivo的质性分析. 中国考试, (5), 19-27.
[11]  邹筱清(2019). 基于新高考选考政策的高中生预选课现状调查. 中小学心理健康教育, (25), 14-18, 24.
[12]  Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the Structure of Interpersonal Closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596-612.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596
[13]  Batteux, E., Ferguson, E., & Tunney, R. J. (2017). Risk Preferences in Surrogate Decision Making. Experimental Psychology, 64, 290-297.
https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000371
[14]  Bolton, G. E., Ockenfels, A., & Stauf, J. (2015). Social Responsibility Promotes Conservative Risk Behavior. European Economic Review, 74, 109-127.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2014.10.002
[15]  Danziger, S., Montal, R., & Barkan, R. (2012). Idealistic Advice and Pragmatic Choice: A Psychological Distance Account. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 1105-1117.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027013
[16]  Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond Pleasure and Pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280-1300.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.52.12.1280
[17]  Liu, H., Wang, L., Yao, M., Yang, H., & Wang, D. (2017). Self‐Other Decision‐Making Differences in Loss Aversion: A Regulatory Focus Perspective. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 47, 90-98.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12426
[18]  Liu, Y., Polman, E., Liu, Y., & Jiao, J. (2018). Choosing for Others and Its Relation to Information Search. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 147, 65-75.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.05.005
[19]  Losecaat Vermeer, A. B., Boksem, M. A. S., & Sanfey, A. G. (2020). Third-Party Decision-Making under Risk as a Function of Prior Gains and Losses. Journal of Economic Psychology, 77, Article ID: 102206.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2019.102206
[20]  Lu, J., Shang, X., & Li, B. (2018). Self-Other Differences in Decision-Making under Risk. Experimental Psychology, 65, 226-235.
https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000404
[21]  Nordbye, G. H. H., Riege, A. H., & Teigen, K. H. (2017). Better Safe than Sorry: Risking Irresponsibility by Seeking Uncertainty. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 31, 87-99.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2049
[22]  Pahlke, J., Strasser, S., & Vieider, F. M. (2015). Responsibility Effects in Decision Making under Risk. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 51, 125-146.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-015-9223-6
[23]  Polman, E. (2012). Effects of Self-Other Decision Making on Regulatory Focus and Choice Overload. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 980-993.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026966
[24]  Polman, E., & Ruttan, R. L. (2022). Making Utilitarian Choices but Giving Deontological Advice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 151, 2614-2621.
https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001194
[25]  Polman, E., & Wu, K. (2020). Decision Making for Others Involving Risk: A Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 77, Article ID: 102184.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2019.06.007
[26]  Ruessmann, J. K., & Topolinski, S. (2019). Economic Decisions for Others Are More Favorable for Close than Distant Clients. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46, 393-407.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219858640
[27]  Woltin, K., & Yzerbyt, V. (2015). Regulatory Focus in Predictions about Others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 379-392.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214566188
[28]  Zhang, X., Liu, Y., Chen, X., Shang, X., & Liu, Y. (2017). Decisions for Others Are Less Risk-Averse in the Gain Frame and Less Risk-Seeking in the Loss Frame than Decisions for the Self. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 1601.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01601

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133