首页> 外文期刊>Cognition & Emotion >The effects of action, normality, and decision carefulness on anticipated regret: Evidence for a broad mediating role of decision justifiability
【24h】

The effects of action, normality, and decision carefulness on anticipated regret: Evidence for a broad mediating role of decision justifiability

机译:行动,正常性和决策谨慎性对预期后悔的影响:决策合理性的广泛中介作用的证据

获取原文
           

摘要

Two distinct theoretical views explain the effects of action/inaction and social normality on anticipated regret. Norm theory (Kahneman & Miller, 1986) emphasises the role of decision mutability, the ease with which one can imagine having made a different choice. Decision justification theory (Connolly & Zeelenberg, 2002) highlights the role of decision justifiability, the perception that the choice was made on a defensible basis, supported by convincing arguments or using a thoughtful, comprehensive decision process. The present paper tests several contrasting predictions from the two theoretical approaches in a series of four studies. Study 1 replicated earlier findings showing greater anticipated regret when the chosen option was abnormal than when it was normal, and perceived justifiability mediated the effect. Study 2 showed that anticipated regret was higher for careless than for careful decisions. Study 3 replicated this finding for a sample holding a different social norm towards the focal decision. Finally, Study 4 found that, when decision carefulness, normality and action/inaction were all specified, only the former showed a significant effect on anticipated regret, and the effect was again mediated by perceived justifiability. Decision justification theory thus appears to provide a better account of anticipated regret intensity in this context than does norm theory.View full textDownload full textKeywordsAnticipated regret, Decision process carefulness, Justifiability, Normality, Regret aversionRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02699930903512168
机译:两种不同的理论观点解释了行动/不作为和社会正常化对预期后悔的影响。规范理论(Kahneman&Miller,1986)强调了决策可变性的作用,即人们可以想象做出不同选择的难易程度。决策合理性理论(Connolly&Zeelenberg,2002)强调了决策合理性的作用,即认为选择是在可辩护的基础上进行的,有说服力的论据或经过深思熟虑的全面决策过程的支持。本文在一系列四项研究中测试了来自两种理论方法的几种对比预测。研究1重复了较早的发现,显示出当所选择的选项异常时比正常情况下更大的预期遗憾,并且认为合理性介导了这种影响。研究2表明,粗心的预期后悔比谨慎的决定要高。研究3将这一发现复制到对焦点决策持有不同社会规范的样本中。最终,研究4发现,当所有的决策谨慎性,正常性和不作为/不作为都被指定时,只有前者对预期的后悔具有显着影响,而这种影响又是由感知的正当性介导的。因此,决策合理性理论似乎比规范理论能更好地说明预期后悔的强度。 ”,services_compact:“ citeulike,网络振动,微博,technorati,美味,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多”,发布号:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02699930903512168

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号