|
|
青少年认知风格对风险决策的影响
|
Abstract:
以往研究发现在成年期以上的被试认知风格会对风险决策有影响，但对于初中生团体关于风险决策的研究较少，并且对初中生风险偏好的影响因素研究也很少。本研究目的是探究青少年的认知风格对风险决策的影响。选取12~19岁的初、高中生为被试，通过风险偏好问卷、镶嵌图形测验和气球模拟风险决策任务。研究发现：在青少年被试中，认知风格之间不存在性别差异，但是随着年龄的增长，认知风格差异显著。在气球模拟风险决策任务中，不同认知风格被试的BART值差异不显著，不同认知风格被试的吹爆气球个数差异也不显著。研究结果阐述青少年的心理分化水平是逐渐升高，但其对于冒险行为的影响不大，这对进一步探究初中生的冒险行为机制具有一定的启示意义。
Previous studies have found that the cognitive style of participants above adulthood has an impact on risk decision-making, but there are few studies on the risk decision-making of junior high school students, and there are few studies on the influencing factors of risk preference among junior high school students. The purpose of this study was to explore the influence of adolescents' cognitive style on risk decision-making. Middle and high school students aged 12~19 were selected as the subjects to get the risk preference questionnaire, mosaic pattern test and balloon simulated risk decision-making task. The results showed that there was no gender difference between cognitive styles among adolescent subjects, but there were significant differences in cognitive styles with age. There was no significant difference in the BART value of participants with different cognitive styles and the number of balloons with different cognitive styles. The results show that the level of psychological differentiation of adolescents is gradually increasing, but it has little effect on risk-taking behavior, which has certain implications for further exploring the mechanism of risk-taking behavior among junior high school students.
| [1] | 邓尧, 王梦梦, 饶恒毅(2022). 风险决策研究中的仿真气球冒险任务. 心理科学进展, (6), 1377-1392. |
| [2] | 董圣鸿, 王珍(2003). 高中生认知方式特点及其与学绩关系的研究. 心理学探新, 23(2), 35-38. |
| [3] | 窦凯, 聂衍刚, 王玉洁, 黎建斌, 沈汪兵(2014). 自我损耗促进冲动决策: 来自行为和ERPs的证据. 心理学报, 46(10), 1564-1579. |
| [4] | 郭蝉瑜, 庄恺祥, 谭柳, 曾荣灿, 佟浩, 邱江, 曹贵康(2021). 场独立-场依存认知风格影响创造性思维的大脑功能基础. 科学通报, 66(19), 2430-2440. |
| [5] | 韩玉昌, 张健, 杨文兵(2014). 认知风格影响框架效应的ERP研究. 心理科学, (3), 549-554. |
| [6] | 何孟雁(2017). 框架效应和自我损耗对风险决策的影响. 硕士学位论文, 漳州: 闽南师范大学. |
| [7] | 胡韬, 刘敏(2005). 中小学生认知风格发展差异研究. 晋中学院学报, (5), 90-92. |
| [8] | 柯照文, 李建民, 柯晓晓, 汪亚珉(2020). 虚拟现实学习环境中的个性化测验研究——以认知风格测验为例. 远程教育杂志, (6), 104-112. |
| [9] | 李寿欣, 宋广文(1999). 西方认知方式研究概观. 国外社会科学, (1), 19-24. |
| [10] | 彭聃龄(2012). 普通心理学. 北京师范大学出版社. |
| [11] | 邱扶东, 吴明证(2005). 认知方式与消极情绪对旅游决策影响的实验研究. 心理科学, 28(5), 1112-1114. |
| [12] | 孙云瑞, 李辉(2012). 场认知方式与高中生学习成绩的相关性. 中小学心理健康教育, (5), 13-15. |
| [13] | 王惠萍(2006). 认知风格对大学生不确定条件下判断和决策的影响. 应用心理学, 12(4), 340-346. |
| [14] | 王青春, 阴国恩, 张善霞, 姚姝君(2011). 青少年决策中的风险选择框架效应. 心理与行为研究, 9(4), 268-272. |
| [15] | 王瑞冰, 徐盛, 朱麟, 王芸萍, 刘聪慧(2023). 认知需求和认知闭合需求对风险决策中外语效应的影响. 心理科学, (1), 121-129. |
| [16] | 王玉洁(2013). 冲动性对风险决策影响的实验研究. 硕士学位论文, 广州: 广州大学. |
| [17] | 夏大勇(2016). 自尊水平与同伴在场对青少年冒险行为的影响. 硕士学位论文, 济南: 山东师范大学. |
| [18] | 颜延, 余嘉元, 夏元, 王亚南(1997). 中小学生的认知风格研究. 南京师大学报, (1), 81-86. |
| [19] | 杨怡(2014). 个体认知风格与内隐态度对危机决策影响的实证研究. 硕士学位论文, 西安: 西北大学. |
| [20] | 殷晓莉(2004). 决策不一致性的心理机制探讨. 硕士学位论文, 长沙: 湖南师范大学. |
| [21] | 张厚粲(1982). 关于认知方式的测验研究. 心理科学通讯, (2), 175-177. |
| [22] | 张厚粲, 孟庆茂, 郑日昌(1981). 关于认知方式的实验研究——场依存性特征对学习和图形后效的影响. 心理学报, (3), 299-304. |
| [23] | 赵立, 侯圣航, 高志华(2022). 效价、唤醒水平和框架效应对风险决策的影响. 中国健康心理学杂志, 30(12), 1772-1777. |
| [24] | Burnett, S., Bault, N., Coricelli, G., & Blakemore, S. (2010). Adolescents’ Heightened Risk-Seeking in a Probabilistic Gambling Task. Cognitive Development, 25, 183-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2009.11.003 |
| [25] | Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (2005). Differences in the Economic Decisions of Men and Women: Experimental Evidence. In C. Plott, & V. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results (Vol. 1, pp. 509-519). North Holland. |
| [26] | Hsee, C. K., & Weber, E. U. (1997). A Fundamental Prediction Error: Self-Others Discrepancies in Risk Preference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 45-53. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-3445.126.1.45 |
| [27] | Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics. American Economic Review, 93, 1449-1475. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803322655392 |
| [28] | Kutschera, I. (2002). Cognitive Style and Decision Making: Implications of Intuitive and Analytical Information Processing Decision Quality. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Oregon. |
| [29] | Lejuez, C. W., Aklin, W. M., Zvolensky, M. J., & Pedulla, C. M. (2003). Evaluation of the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) as a Predictor of Adolescent Real‐World Risk‐Taking Behaviours. Journal of Adolescence, 26, 475-479. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-1971(03)00036-8 |
| [30] | Lejuez, C. W., Read, J. P., Kahler, C. W., Richards, J. B., Ramsey, S. E., Stuart, G. L. et al. (2002). Evaluation of a Behavioral Measure of Risk Taking: The Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 75-84. https://doi.org/10.1037//1076-898x.8.2.75 |
| [31] | Reyna, V. F., & Ellis, S. C. (1994). Fuzzy-Trace Theory and Framing Effects in Children’s Risky Decision Making. Psychological Science, 5, 275-279. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00625.x |
| [32] | Riding, R., & Rayner, S. (1998). Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies. London David Fulton Publishers. |
| [33] | Rolison, J. J., Hanoch, Y., & Wood, S. (2012). Risky Decision Making in Younger and Older Adults: The Role of Learning. Psychology and Aging, 27, 129-140. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024689 |
| [34] | Witkin, H. A., & Goodenough, D. R. (1977). Field Dependence and Interpersonal Behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 661-689. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.84.4.661 |
