建议的表面采纳的测量方法
|
摘要
前人研究建议采纳多集中于决策者初始决策和最终决策的区别,未曾考虑过决策者的内隐态度。本研究关注决策者的内隐态度,将建议采纳分成表面采纳与真实采纳,创新地提出用内隐联想测验法和重测法测量表面采纳。比较两种方法,它们各有利弊,内隐联想测验法理论基础较扎实但灵敏度不及重测法,重测法操作较简便但更容易出现被试脱落等问题。
Decision-making has become a hot topic in psychological research for a long time,and research of advice-taking is also on the rise.The previous research of advice-taking mostly starts with the difference between the judge's initial decision and the final decision,whereas not considering the implicit attitude of the judge.In this study,from the perspective of implicit attitude,advice-taking is divided into nominal advice-taking and real advice-taking.In nominal advice-taking,judges may accept advices verbally,but the judge's heart does not really accept advices,from the point of implicit attitude,although finally they accept advices,but the implicit cognition and attitude has not changed.Cognitive dissonance may exist in the process.The experiment uses the implicit association test and test-retest method to measure the nominal advice-taking and compares the two methods.The participants are randomly selected by the two methods of implicit association test(N=67) and test-retest method(N=52).All the subjects are with normal vision,without Color blindness and color weakness.Implicit association test is an indirect way to measure implicit social cognition of individuals by measuring the evaluative relationship between concept words and attribute words.In this method,we pick out the questions in which the judge accepts the advice,then statistically collect the reaction time of the two options between the compatible group and the incompatible group for comparison.Thus,we can measure the degree of nominal advice-taking.The test-retest method is the same test of two times for the same subjects with a certain interval of time.In this method,we compare the choices of the same question by the same participant to measure the degree of nominal advice-taking.Firstly,the word search task is used to initiate a low sense of power of the participant.Then participants need to finish a decision task.In the implicit association test,participants are required to complete a task of categorizing words at the same time.The reaction time of the participants is analyzed to measure the degree of nominal advice-taking.If the reaction time of the compatible group is longer than the incompatible group,then in this question,the judge has nominal advice-taking.In the test-retest method,the participants are required to complete the same decision task after two weeks.Finally,the choices are compared in two times to measure the degree of nominal advice-taking.If the choices are different,the judge has nominal advice-taking.The study finds that,first of all,two kinds of measuring methods are able to measure the nominal advice-taking of judge successfully.However,the results of the two kinds of measuring methods are different.The degree of nominal advice-taking measured by test-retest method is higher than implicit association test.Overall,this study emphasizes the implicit attitude.From this point of view,advice-taking is divided into nominal advice-taking and real advicetaking.Two methods are used to measure the nominal advice-taking of the judge.It lays a foundation for the research of nominal advice-taking,and opens a new direction for the research of advice-taking.
Decision-making has become a hot topic in psychological research for a long time,and research of advice-taking is also on the rise.The previous research of advice-taking mostly starts with the difference between the judge's initial decision and the final decision,whereas not considering the implicit attitude of the judge.In this study,from the perspective of implicit attitude,advice-taking is divided into nominal advice-taking and real advice-taking.In nominal advice-taking,judges may accept advices verbally,but the judge's heart does not really accept advices,from the point of implicit attitude,although finally they accept advices,but the implicit cognition and attitude has not changed.Cognitive dissonance may exist in the process.The experiment uses the implicit association test and test-retest method to measure the nominal advice-taking and compares the two methods.The participants are randomly selected by the two methods of implicit association test(N=67) and test-retest method(N=52).All the subjects are with normal vision,without Color blindness and color weakness.Implicit association test is an indirect way to measure implicit social cognition of individuals by measuring the evaluative relationship between concept words and attribute words.In this method,we pick out the questions in which the judge accepts the advice,then statistically collect the reaction time of the two options between the compatible group and the incompatible group for comparison.Thus,we can measure the degree of nominal advice-taking.The test-retest method is the same test of two times for the same subjects with a certain interval of time.In this method,we compare the choices of the same question by the same participant to measure the degree of nominal advice-taking.Firstly,the word search task is used to initiate a low sense of power of the participant.Then participants need to finish a decision task.In the implicit association test,participants are required to complete a task of categorizing words at the same time.The reaction time of the participants is analyzed to measure the degree of nominal advice-taking.If the reaction time of the compatible group is longer than the incompatible group,then in this question,the judge has nominal advice-taking.In the test-retest method,the participants are required to complete the same decision task after two weeks.Finally,the choices are compared in two times to measure the degree of nominal advice-taking.If the choices are different,the judge has nominal advice-taking.The study finds that,first of all,two kinds of measuring methods are able to measure the nominal advice-taking of judge successfully.However,the results of the two kinds of measuring methods are different.The degree of nominal advice-taking measured by test-retest method is higher than implicit association test.Overall,this study emphasizes the implicit attitude.From this point of view,advice-taking is divided into nominal advice-taking and real advicetaking.Two methods are used to measure the nominal advice-taking of the judge.It lays a foundation for the research of nominal advice-taking,and opens a new direction for the research of advice-taking.
引文
安胜利,陈平雁.(2001).量表的信度及其影响因素.国外医学?社会医学分册,19(1),23-27.
段锦云,孙露莹.(2016).信息完整性缓解权力差距对建议表面采纳的影响.人类工效学,22(6),34-39.
孙露莹,陈琳,段锦云.(2017).决策过程中的建议采纳:策略、影响及未来展望.心理科学进展,25(1),169-179.
徐惊蛰,谢晓非.(2009).决策过程中的建议采纳.心理科学进展,17,1016-1025.
周浩.(2012).充耳不闻与从谏如流:建议采择研究述评.四川大学学报(哲学社会科学版),4,105-111.
Bonaccio,S.,&Dalal,R.S.(2006).Advice taking and decision-making:An integrative literature review,and implications for the organizational sciences.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,101(2),127-151.
Chen,S.,Lee-Chai,A.Y.,&Bargh,J.A.(2001).Relationship orientation as a moderator of the effects of social power.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,80(2),173-187.
Contreras,M.J.,Rubio,V.J.,Pe?a,D.,&Santacreu,J.(2010).On the robustness of solution strategy classifications:Testing the stability of dynamic spatial tasks on a one-year test-retest basis.Journal of Individual Differences,31(2),68-73.
Fast,N.J.,Sivanathan,N.,Mayer,N.D.,&Galinsky,A.D.(2012).Power and overconfident decision-making.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,117(2),249-260.
Galinsky,A.D.,Gruenfeld,D.H.,&Magee,J.C.(2003).From power to action.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,85(3),453-466.
Gardner,W.L.,Avolio,B.J.,Luthans,F.,May,D.R.,&Walumbwa,F.(2005).“Can you see the real me?”A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development.The Leadership Quarterly,16(3),343-372.
Gino,F.,&Schweitzer,M.E.(2008).Blinded by anger or feeling the love:How emotions influence advice taking.Journal of Applied Psychology,93(5),1165-1173.
Greenwald,A.G.,McGhee,D.E.,&Schwartz,J.L.K.(1998).Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition:The implicit association test.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74(6),1464-1480.
Greenwald,A.G.,Nosek,B.A.,&Banaji,M.R.(2003).Understanding and using the implicit association test:I.An improved scoring algorithm.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,85(2),197-216.
Hall,E.T.(1976).Beyond culture.Garden City,NY:Anchor Press.
Krueger,J.L.(2003).Return of the ego-self-referent information as a filter for social prediction:Comment on Karniol(2003).Psychological Review,110,585-590.
Magee,J.C.,&Smith,P.K.(2013).The social distance theory of power.Personality and Social Psychology Review,17(2),158-186.
Rogers,R.W.(1975).A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change.The Journal of Psychology,91(1),93-114.
Yaniv,I.(2004).Receiving other people's advice:Influence and benefit.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,93(1),1-13.
段锦云,孙露莹.(2016).信息完整性缓解权力差距对建议表面采纳的影响.人类工效学,22(6),34-39.
孙露莹,陈琳,段锦云.(2017).决策过程中的建议采纳:策略、影响及未来展望.心理科学进展,25(1),169-179.
徐惊蛰,谢晓非.(2009).决策过程中的建议采纳.心理科学进展,17,1016-1025.
周浩.(2012).充耳不闻与从谏如流:建议采择研究述评.四川大学学报(哲学社会科学版),4,105-111.
Bonaccio,S.,&Dalal,R.S.(2006).Advice taking and decision-making:An integrative literature review,and implications for the organizational sciences.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,101(2),127-151.
Chen,S.,Lee-Chai,A.Y.,&Bargh,J.A.(2001).Relationship orientation as a moderator of the effects of social power.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,80(2),173-187.
Contreras,M.J.,Rubio,V.J.,Pe?a,D.,&Santacreu,J.(2010).On the robustness of solution strategy classifications:Testing the stability of dynamic spatial tasks on a one-year test-retest basis.Journal of Individual Differences,31(2),68-73.
Fast,N.J.,Sivanathan,N.,Mayer,N.D.,&Galinsky,A.D.(2012).Power and overconfident decision-making.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,117(2),249-260.
Galinsky,A.D.,Gruenfeld,D.H.,&Magee,J.C.(2003).From power to action.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,85(3),453-466.
Gardner,W.L.,Avolio,B.J.,Luthans,F.,May,D.R.,&Walumbwa,F.(2005).“Can you see the real me?”A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development.The Leadership Quarterly,16(3),343-372.
Gino,F.,&Schweitzer,M.E.(2008).Blinded by anger or feeling the love:How emotions influence advice taking.Journal of Applied Psychology,93(5),1165-1173.
Greenwald,A.G.,McGhee,D.E.,&Schwartz,J.L.K.(1998).Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition:The implicit association test.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74(6),1464-1480.
Greenwald,A.G.,Nosek,B.A.,&Banaji,M.R.(2003).Understanding and using the implicit association test:I.An improved scoring algorithm.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,85(2),197-216.
Hall,E.T.(1976).Beyond culture.Garden City,NY:Anchor Press.
Krueger,J.L.(2003).Return of the ego-self-referent information as a filter for social prediction:Comment on Karniol(2003).Psychological Review,110,585-590.
Magee,J.C.,&Smith,P.K.(2013).The social distance theory of power.Personality and Social Psychology Review,17(2),158-186.
Rogers,R.W.(1975).A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change.The Journal of Psychology,91(1),93-114.
Yaniv,I.(2004).Receiving other people's advice:Influence and benefit.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,93(1),1-13.