突发事件下决策者的框架效应研究
|
摘要
近年来,突发事件在全世界,特别是在人口众多且处于经济和社会转型期的中国频繁发生,对生命、财产和社会发展造成重大破坏。决策者的有效决策是应对突发事件的关键,但他们几乎难免被决策方案框架(表达形式)“迷惑”,对效用相同的方案因为其框架不同而做出不同选择,从而出现框架效应。框架效应最早由2002年诺贝尔经济学奖得主Kahneman及其合作者于1981年提出。作为“双刃剑”,框架效应一方面可能对决策产生负面影响,降低决策者应对突发事件的绩效；另一方面又可以被媒体合理利用,使决策者获得公众的支持。因此,突发事件下决策者的框架效应问题具有重要的研究价值。
回顾已有研究,为了加深对突发事件下框架效应的理解,有两方面关键问题需要解决：1)突发事件下的框架效应是否存在,以及该效应的产生机理是什么?2)决策问题背景(对生命进行救援决策,或对货物进行救援决策)、决策者性别和情绪对该效应是否具有影响,以及产生这种影响的原因是什么?以解决上述问题为目的,本文以突发事件下的决策者为对象,完成了三项递进深入的研究。
研究一继承了前人未对决策者明确施加决策时间压力的做法,采用问卷方式考察突发事件下的框架效应是否存在,以及决策问题背景和决策者性别对该效应的影响。研究一为本文与前人研究搭建了“沟通桥梁”,使本文结论能够与已有研究成果相比较。
研究二在研究一的基础上,对决策者明确施加决策时间压力,使研究条件更加贴近真实的突发事件情境。在此情境下,该研究：1)借助ERP(事件相关电位)实验,从行为决策科学和决策神经科学两个层面解释突发事件下框架效应的产生机理；2)考察决策问题背景和决策者性别对框架效应的交互影响。
研究三是对研究二的补充,它增加考察了负性偶然情绪(决策问题的外围因素诱发决策者产生的负性情绪)对突发事件下框架效应的影响,并借助ERP实验从神经科学层面解释了产生这种影响的原因。
通过对三项研究各自结论的整合,本文从整体上得到如下重要结论：
1)决策者应对突发事件的决策会受到决策方案框架的影响,产生框架效应,并因此而降低决策速度。
2)就突发事件下对生命进行救援决策的男性决策者而言,决策时间压力对其框架效应有强化作用,使他们由不受到框架影响转变为出现经典的框架效应。
3)决策问题背景和决策者性别对突发事件下的框架效应存在交互影响。当生命和货物同时需要救援时,无论决策者的性别如何,货物问题都无法引起他们的足够重视；相反,生命问题能够诱发决策者较高的决策动机,使男性决策者出现经典的双向框架效应,但却使女性决策者出现偏向风险的单向框架效应。
4)在突发事件下对生命进行救援时,女性比男性决策者更容易受到决策框架影响,并且比男性决策者更冲动和冒险。无论是否受到决策时间压力,女性决策者都出现框架效应；而男性决策者只在承受决策时间压力时出现框架效应。此外,女性决策者在更短的时间内凭直觉决策,并且其风险偏好高于男性决策者。
5)P2、N2、P3和N500这4个脑电成分的综合作用是决策者在突发事件下产生框架效应的神经科学机理。P2、N2、P3和N500波幅的变化意味着在同种(正性或负性)框架下,选择同等效用的确定性方案和风险方案之间,决策者的风险感知速度、决策冲突强度、决策难度和决策者对决策结果的不确定性存在显著差异。因此,决策者对确定性方案和风险方案做出不同选择,形成框架效应。
6)负性偶然情绪使突发事件下的决策者在正性框架下更多的选择风险方案,而这种影响可以通过P2、N2、P3和N500波幅的变化来解释。同样是决策者在正性框架下选择确定性方案,与中性情绪相比,负性偶然情绪使P2、N2、P3和N500的波幅分别显著减小、增大、减小及增大。这意味着决策者的风险感知速度加快,决策冲突、难度和对结果的不确定性同时增大,从而降低他们在正性框架下选择确定性方案的可能性,使他们在正性框架下更多的选择风险方案。
作为一次以决策神经科学方法为主,对突发事件下决策者框架效应问题的探索,本文的创新之处体现在以下4个方面：
1)本文对决策者明确施加决策时间压力,并基于此发现对于在突发事件下进行生命救援决策的男性决策者而言,决策时间压力对框架效应具有强化作用。尽管前人强调决策时间压力是突发事件区别于非突发事件的显著标志,但他们并未对决策者明确施加决策时间压力,从而对突发事件情境的模拟效果存在不足。本文克服了这一局限,增强了本文结论对于突发事件的适用性,同时也将人们关于决策时间压力对框架效应强化作用的讨论背景延伸到突发事件领域。特别是本文有关决策时间压力在决策问题背景和决策者性别的共同调节下对框架效应产生强化作用的结论,推进了人们对于决策时间压力与框架效应之间关系的理解。
2)本文借助ERP实验,从脑电成分的角度,解释了突发事件下框架效应的产生机理,使人们对此机理的认识由行为决策科学层面深入到决策神经科学层面。前人通过fMRI(功能核磁共振)实验讨论了投资问题中框架效应的产生机理,但其结论未必适用于突发事件情境。本文采取比fMRI下决策问题研究的ERP实验获得P2、N2、P3和N500成分的活动特征,并将其与行为决策科学理论相结合,使人们能够更全面和深入的理解突发事件下的框架效应,也为后人将ERP实验应用于突发事件下决策问题的研究提供了示范。
3)本文发现和解释了突发事件下决策问题背景和决策者性别对框架效应的交互影响。前人分别单独考察了决策问题背景和决策者性别对突发事件下框架效应的影响,但并未将这两个因素同时纳入研究体系。本文弥补了这一缺憾,并从理论上建议突发事件应急管理工作应该对生命救援和货物救援分别处理,并且高度重视女性比男性决策者更加冲动和冒险,以及更易受决策框架影响的特点。
4)本文发现负性偶然情绪能够使突发事件下的决策者在正性框架下的风险偏好显著增强,并借助ERP实验,从决策神经科学层面对此影响进行了解释。前人仅在消费者购买决策领域讨论负性偶然情绪对框架效应的影响。本文充分认识负性偶然情绪在突发事件下的普遍性,在突发事件领域考察和解释负性偶然情绪对框架效应的影响。根据研究结论,本文建议,为了防止应对突发事件的决策者过于冒险,应使他们尽量避免接触可能诱发负性偶然情绪的影音资料等素材,而使他们尽量针对决策问题本身进行思考。
In recent years, more and more paroxysmal events have been happening frequently all over the world, especially in China, the country with a huge number of people during the period of economical and social transition. These events have caused significant damages to lives, properties and social development. Efficient decision making is the key to cope with such events. However, decision makes can hardly avoid framing effect, which means they make different choices on the alternatives with the same utility but various forms of presentations. Kahneman, who won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2002, discovered framing effect with his collaborator in 1981. As a double edged sword, framing effect has negative effect on decision makers'performance under paroxysmal events, but can also be used properly by media to help decision makers winning public support. Therefore, it is of great value to research decision makers'framing effect under paroxysmal events.
In order to understand the framing effect under paroxysmal events more profoundly, there are two important topics to discuss.1) Is there framing effect under paroxysmal events? If so, what is the mechanism of such effect? 2) Whether the decision problem domain (life or commodity), decision maker's gender and emotion influence framing effect? If so, what is the mechanism of such influence? With the purpose to answer these questions, this thesis completes three studies step by step with the decision makers under paroxysmal events as research object.
Following the literature, study 1 exerts no explicit time pressure on decision makers, and uses questionnaire to investigate whether framing effect exists and the influence of decision problem domain and decision maker's gender on framing effect. This study is a bridge, making it possible to compare the current conclusions with the literature.
Based on study 1, study 2 exerts time pressure explicitly on decision makers, which makes the research circumstances more similar to the reality. This study fulfills two tasks:1) explain the mechanism of framing effect under paroxysmal events with ERP (event-related potentials) experiment both on the behavioral and neural level; 2) study the interactive influence of decision problem domain and decision maker's gender on framing effect under paroxysmal events.
Study 3 is a complement to study 2. It focuses on the influence of negative incidental emotion (negative emotion induced by factors out of the current decision problems) on framing effect under paroxysmal events, and explain the mechanism of such influence on the level of decision neuroscience with ERP experiment.
We can come to the following important conclusions based on the integration of conclusions from the three studies in this thesis.
1) There is framing effect on decision makers under paroxysmal events, resulting in more slowly decision making.
2) When the male decision makers are making decisions on lives problems under paroxysmal events, decision time pressure can strengthen the framing effect, drawing the male decision makers who were immune to decision frames into classical framing effect.
3) The decision problem domain and gender have interactive effect on framing effect under paroxysmal events. When lives and commodities need rescuing simultaneously, the decision maker doesn't attach enough importance to the commodities regardless of the gender. In contrast, lives saving problems induce higher decision motivation, leading classical framing effect in male decision makers and unidirectional framing effect of risk seeking in the females.
4) Facing lives saving problems, the females are more prone to show framing effect and more impulse and risk seeking than male decision makers. Female decision makers show framing effect irrespective of decision time pressure. However, decision time pressure is a prerequisite to the male decision makers'framing effect. When it comes to female decision makers, they usually make intuitive decisions in shorter time, and show higher risk preference than male decision makers.
5) The comprehensive role of P2, N2, P3 and N500 is the neural mechanism for the framing effects under paroxysmal events. The changing of the amplitude of P2, N2, P3 and N500 indicates that there are significant differences of risk perception speed, decision conflict, and decision difficulty and decision makers'uncertainty with their decisions when decision makers make choices between the certain alternative and the risky alternative with the same utility under a certain frame. Due to these reasons, decision makers make different choice on the certain and the risky alternative, causing framing effect.
6) The negative incidental emotion strengthens decision makers'risk preference under the negative frame, and such influence can be explained by the changes of the amplitude of P2, N2, P3 and N500. Compared to neutral emotion, when decision makers with negative incidental emotion choose the certain alternative under the positive frame, the amplitude of P2, N2, P3 and N500 decreases, increases, decreases and increases significantly. This means that the risk perception speed, decision conflict, decision difficulty and uncertainty with decision choice of the decision maker increase simultaneously and lead the decision maker more possible to choose risky alternative under the positive frame.
As an exploration to framing effect under paroxysmal events mainly with the method of decision neuroscience, this thesis has four innovations.
1) Decision time pressure is exerted on decision makers explicitly in this thesis, based on which the strengthening effect of decision time pressure on framing effect for male decision makers facing lives rescuing problems under paroxysmal events is discovered. Decision time pressure has been emphasized as the key factor to distinguish paroxysmal events from normal events in the literature, but no research has exerted decision time pressure explicitly on decision makers before. This thesis overcomes such limitation. It extends the discussion background of the strengthening effect of decision time pressure on framing effect to paroxysmal events, and gives people a deeper understanding of the relationship between decision time pressure and framing effect by finding the interactive role of decision problem domain and decision maker's gender on such relationship.
2) The mechanism of framing effect under paroxysmal events is explained under the perspective of brain potentials with ERP experiment in this thesis. The mechanism of framing effect in the domain of investment problems has been explained with fMRI experiment, but the conclusions may not be suitable to paroxysmal events. ERP experiment is more suitable to study decision problems under paroxysmal events than fMRI and is employed by this thesis. Taking the results of P2, N2, P3 and N500 of the ERP experiment and related theories of behavioral decision science together, this thesis reaches a more comprehensive and deeper understanding of framing effect under paroxysmal events. This thesis can also be taken as an example for the application of ERP experiment in the research of decision problems under paroxysmal events.
3) The interactive effect between decision problem domain and the decision maker's gender has been found and explained by this thesis. The main effect of decision problem domain and the decision maker's gender has been discussed by scholars in the domain of paroxysmal events, but no research has taken these two factors into account simultaneously. This limitation has been overcome by this thesis. Lives and commodities should be treated separately under paroxysmal events has been suggested. Besides this, female is more impulsive, risk seeking and easier to be influenced by decision frames, which should be paid more attention in the paroxysmal events management.
4) The negative incidental emotion has been found to significantly strengthen decision makers'risk preference under the positive frame, and such effect's mechanism is explained by ERP experiment on the neuroscience level in this thesis. The literature discusses the influence of the negative incidental emotion on framing effect only in the domain of consumer purchasing decision. This thesis attaches importance to the prevalence of the negative incidental emotion under paroxysmal events, and conducts an ERP experiment on this topic. Based on the theoretical conclusions, it is suggested that decision makers under paroxysmal events should stay away from media information which is possible to induce the negative incidental emotion as far as possible and be encouraged to trade off the alternatives based on the problem itself.
回顾已有研究,为了加深对突发事件下框架效应的理解,有两方面关键问题需要解决：1)突发事件下的框架效应是否存在,以及该效应的产生机理是什么?2)决策问题背景(对生命进行救援决策,或对货物进行救援决策)、决策者性别和情绪对该效应是否具有影响,以及产生这种影响的原因是什么?以解决上述问题为目的,本文以突发事件下的决策者为对象,完成了三项递进深入的研究。
研究一继承了前人未对决策者明确施加决策时间压力的做法,采用问卷方式考察突发事件下的框架效应是否存在,以及决策问题背景和决策者性别对该效应的影响。研究一为本文与前人研究搭建了“沟通桥梁”,使本文结论能够与已有研究成果相比较。
研究二在研究一的基础上,对决策者明确施加决策时间压力,使研究条件更加贴近真实的突发事件情境。在此情境下,该研究：1)借助ERP(事件相关电位)实验,从行为决策科学和决策神经科学两个层面解释突发事件下框架效应的产生机理；2)考察决策问题背景和决策者性别对框架效应的交互影响。
研究三是对研究二的补充,它增加考察了负性偶然情绪(决策问题的外围因素诱发决策者产生的负性情绪)对突发事件下框架效应的影响,并借助ERP实验从神经科学层面解释了产生这种影响的原因。
通过对三项研究各自结论的整合,本文从整体上得到如下重要结论：
1)决策者应对突发事件的决策会受到决策方案框架的影响,产生框架效应,并因此而降低决策速度。
2)就突发事件下对生命进行救援决策的男性决策者而言,决策时间压力对其框架效应有强化作用,使他们由不受到框架影响转变为出现经典的框架效应。
3)决策问题背景和决策者性别对突发事件下的框架效应存在交互影响。当生命和货物同时需要救援时,无论决策者的性别如何,货物问题都无法引起他们的足够重视；相反,生命问题能够诱发决策者较高的决策动机,使男性决策者出现经典的双向框架效应,但却使女性决策者出现偏向风险的单向框架效应。
4)在突发事件下对生命进行救援时,女性比男性决策者更容易受到决策框架影响,并且比男性决策者更冲动和冒险。无论是否受到决策时间压力,女性决策者都出现框架效应；而男性决策者只在承受决策时间压力时出现框架效应。此外,女性决策者在更短的时间内凭直觉决策,并且其风险偏好高于男性决策者。
5)P2、N2、P3和N500这4个脑电成分的综合作用是决策者在突发事件下产生框架效应的神经科学机理。P2、N2、P3和N500波幅的变化意味着在同种(正性或负性)框架下,选择同等效用的确定性方案和风险方案之间,决策者的风险感知速度、决策冲突强度、决策难度和决策者对决策结果的不确定性存在显著差异。因此,决策者对确定性方案和风险方案做出不同选择,形成框架效应。
6)负性偶然情绪使突发事件下的决策者在正性框架下更多的选择风险方案,而这种影响可以通过P2、N2、P3和N500波幅的变化来解释。同样是决策者在正性框架下选择确定性方案,与中性情绪相比,负性偶然情绪使P2、N2、P3和N500的波幅分别显著减小、增大、减小及增大。这意味着决策者的风险感知速度加快,决策冲突、难度和对结果的不确定性同时增大,从而降低他们在正性框架下选择确定性方案的可能性,使他们在正性框架下更多的选择风险方案。
作为一次以决策神经科学方法为主,对突发事件下决策者框架效应问题的探索,本文的创新之处体现在以下4个方面：
1)本文对决策者明确施加决策时间压力,并基于此发现对于在突发事件下进行生命救援决策的男性决策者而言,决策时间压力对框架效应具有强化作用。尽管前人强调决策时间压力是突发事件区别于非突发事件的显著标志,但他们并未对决策者明确施加决策时间压力,从而对突发事件情境的模拟效果存在不足。本文克服了这一局限,增强了本文结论对于突发事件的适用性,同时也将人们关于决策时间压力对框架效应强化作用的讨论背景延伸到突发事件领域。特别是本文有关决策时间压力在决策问题背景和决策者性别的共同调节下对框架效应产生强化作用的结论,推进了人们对于决策时间压力与框架效应之间关系的理解。
2)本文借助ERP实验,从脑电成分的角度,解释了突发事件下框架效应的产生机理,使人们对此机理的认识由行为决策科学层面深入到决策神经科学层面。前人通过fMRI(功能核磁共振)实验讨论了投资问题中框架效应的产生机理,但其结论未必适用于突发事件情境。本文采取比fMRI下决策问题研究的ERP实验获得P2、N2、P3和N500成分的活动特征,并将其与行为决策科学理论相结合,使人们能够更全面和深入的理解突发事件下的框架效应,也为后人将ERP实验应用于突发事件下决策问题的研究提供了示范。
3)本文发现和解释了突发事件下决策问题背景和决策者性别对框架效应的交互影响。前人分别单独考察了决策问题背景和决策者性别对突发事件下框架效应的影响,但并未将这两个因素同时纳入研究体系。本文弥补了这一缺憾,并从理论上建议突发事件应急管理工作应该对生命救援和货物救援分别处理,并且高度重视女性比男性决策者更加冲动和冒险,以及更易受决策框架影响的特点。
4)本文发现负性偶然情绪能够使突发事件下的决策者在正性框架下的风险偏好显著增强,并借助ERP实验,从决策神经科学层面对此影响进行了解释。前人仅在消费者购买决策领域讨论负性偶然情绪对框架效应的影响。本文充分认识负性偶然情绪在突发事件下的普遍性,在突发事件领域考察和解释负性偶然情绪对框架效应的影响。根据研究结论,本文建议,为了防止应对突发事件的决策者过于冒险,应使他们尽量避免接触可能诱发负性偶然情绪的影音资料等素材,而使他们尽量针对决策问题本身进行思考。
In recent years, more and more paroxysmal events have been happening frequently all over the world, especially in China, the country with a huge number of people during the period of economical and social transition. These events have caused significant damages to lives, properties and social development. Efficient decision making is the key to cope with such events. However, decision makes can hardly avoid framing effect, which means they make different choices on the alternatives with the same utility but various forms of presentations. Kahneman, who won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2002, discovered framing effect with his collaborator in 1981. As a double edged sword, framing effect has negative effect on decision makers'performance under paroxysmal events, but can also be used properly by media to help decision makers winning public support. Therefore, it is of great value to research decision makers'framing effect under paroxysmal events.
In order to understand the framing effect under paroxysmal events more profoundly, there are two important topics to discuss.1) Is there framing effect under paroxysmal events? If so, what is the mechanism of such effect? 2) Whether the decision problem domain (life or commodity), decision maker's gender and emotion influence framing effect? If so, what is the mechanism of such influence? With the purpose to answer these questions, this thesis completes three studies step by step with the decision makers under paroxysmal events as research object.
Following the literature, study 1 exerts no explicit time pressure on decision makers, and uses questionnaire to investigate whether framing effect exists and the influence of decision problem domain and decision maker's gender on framing effect. This study is a bridge, making it possible to compare the current conclusions with the literature.
Based on study 1, study 2 exerts time pressure explicitly on decision makers, which makes the research circumstances more similar to the reality. This study fulfills two tasks:1) explain the mechanism of framing effect under paroxysmal events with ERP (event-related potentials) experiment both on the behavioral and neural level; 2) study the interactive influence of decision problem domain and decision maker's gender on framing effect under paroxysmal events.
Study 3 is a complement to study 2. It focuses on the influence of negative incidental emotion (negative emotion induced by factors out of the current decision problems) on framing effect under paroxysmal events, and explain the mechanism of such influence on the level of decision neuroscience with ERP experiment.
We can come to the following important conclusions based on the integration of conclusions from the three studies in this thesis.
1) There is framing effect on decision makers under paroxysmal events, resulting in more slowly decision making.
2) When the male decision makers are making decisions on lives problems under paroxysmal events, decision time pressure can strengthen the framing effect, drawing the male decision makers who were immune to decision frames into classical framing effect.
3) The decision problem domain and gender have interactive effect on framing effect under paroxysmal events. When lives and commodities need rescuing simultaneously, the decision maker doesn't attach enough importance to the commodities regardless of the gender. In contrast, lives saving problems induce higher decision motivation, leading classical framing effect in male decision makers and unidirectional framing effect of risk seeking in the females.
4) Facing lives saving problems, the females are more prone to show framing effect and more impulse and risk seeking than male decision makers. Female decision makers show framing effect irrespective of decision time pressure. However, decision time pressure is a prerequisite to the male decision makers'framing effect. When it comes to female decision makers, they usually make intuitive decisions in shorter time, and show higher risk preference than male decision makers.
5) The comprehensive role of P2, N2, P3 and N500 is the neural mechanism for the framing effects under paroxysmal events. The changing of the amplitude of P2, N2, P3 and N500 indicates that there are significant differences of risk perception speed, decision conflict, and decision difficulty and decision makers'uncertainty with their decisions when decision makers make choices between the certain alternative and the risky alternative with the same utility under a certain frame. Due to these reasons, decision makers make different choice on the certain and the risky alternative, causing framing effect.
6) The negative incidental emotion strengthens decision makers'risk preference under the negative frame, and such influence can be explained by the changes of the amplitude of P2, N2, P3 and N500. Compared to neutral emotion, when decision makers with negative incidental emotion choose the certain alternative under the positive frame, the amplitude of P2, N2, P3 and N500 decreases, increases, decreases and increases significantly. This means that the risk perception speed, decision conflict, decision difficulty and uncertainty with decision choice of the decision maker increase simultaneously and lead the decision maker more possible to choose risky alternative under the positive frame.
As an exploration to framing effect under paroxysmal events mainly with the method of decision neuroscience, this thesis has four innovations.
1) Decision time pressure is exerted on decision makers explicitly in this thesis, based on which the strengthening effect of decision time pressure on framing effect for male decision makers facing lives rescuing problems under paroxysmal events is discovered. Decision time pressure has been emphasized as the key factor to distinguish paroxysmal events from normal events in the literature, but no research has exerted decision time pressure explicitly on decision makers before. This thesis overcomes such limitation. It extends the discussion background of the strengthening effect of decision time pressure on framing effect to paroxysmal events, and gives people a deeper understanding of the relationship between decision time pressure and framing effect by finding the interactive role of decision problem domain and decision maker's gender on such relationship.
2) The mechanism of framing effect under paroxysmal events is explained under the perspective of brain potentials with ERP experiment in this thesis. The mechanism of framing effect in the domain of investment problems has been explained with fMRI experiment, but the conclusions may not be suitable to paroxysmal events. ERP experiment is more suitable to study decision problems under paroxysmal events than fMRI and is employed by this thesis. Taking the results of P2, N2, P3 and N500 of the ERP experiment and related theories of behavioral decision science together, this thesis reaches a more comprehensive and deeper understanding of framing effect under paroxysmal events. This thesis can also be taken as an example for the application of ERP experiment in the research of decision problems under paroxysmal events.
3) The interactive effect between decision problem domain and the decision maker's gender has been found and explained by this thesis. The main effect of decision problem domain and the decision maker's gender has been discussed by scholars in the domain of paroxysmal events, but no research has taken these two factors into account simultaneously. This limitation has been overcome by this thesis. Lives and commodities should be treated separately under paroxysmal events has been suggested. Besides this, female is more impulsive, risk seeking and easier to be influenced by decision frames, which should be paid more attention in the paroxysmal events management.
4) The negative incidental emotion has been found to significantly strengthen decision makers'risk preference under the positive frame, and such effect's mechanism is explained by ERP experiment on the neuroscience level in this thesis. The literature discusses the influence of the negative incidental emotion on framing effect only in the domain of consumer purchasing decision. This thesis attaches importance to the prevalence of the negative incidental emotion under paroxysmal events, and conducts an ERP experiment on this topic. Based on the theoretical conclusions, it is suggested that decision makers under paroxysmal events should stay away from media information which is possible to induce the negative incidental emotion as far as possible and be encouraged to trade off the alternatives based on the problem itself.
引文
[1]Ahmed, K., & Noureddine B. Investigation of the performance of emergency ventilation strategies in the event of fires in a road tunnel-A case study. Journal of Fire Protection Engineering,2008,18,165-198.
[2]Albert, J., Lopez-Martin, S., & Carretie, L. Emotional context modulates response inhibition:Neural and behavioral data. NeuroImage,2010,49,914-921.
[3]Arkes, H. R., Herren, L. T., & Isen, A. M. The role of potential loss in the influence of affect on decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1988,47,181-193.
[4]Ashby, G. F., Alfonso-Reese, L. A., & Turken, U., et al. A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning. Psychological Review,1998, 195,442-451.
[5]Barbara, R., & Matthew W. S. Crisis and emergency risk communication as an integrative model. Journal of Health Communication,2005,10,43-55.
[6]Baron, J. The effect of normative beliefs on anticipated emotions. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,1992,63,320-330.
[7]Baron, J. Nonconsequentialist decisions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,1994, 17,1-42.
[8]Barrett, L. F. Valence as a basic building block of emotional life. Journal of Research in Personality,2006,40,35-55.
[9]Bartholow, B. D., Riordan, M. A., & Saults, J. S., et al. Psychophysiological evidence of response conflict and strategic control of responses in affective priming. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,2009,45,655-666.
[10]Bateman, C. R., Fraedrich, J. P., & Iyer, R. Framing effects within the ethical decision making process of consumers. Journal of Business Ethics,2002,36(1), 119-140.
[11]Bechara, A., & Damasio, A. R. The somatic marker hypothesis:A neural theory of economic decision. Games and Economic Behavior,2005,52,336-372.
[12]Becker, S. W., & Brownson, F. O. What price ambiguity? Or the role of ambiguity in decision-making. Journal of Political Economy,1964,72(1),62-73.
[13]Bekker, E. M., Kenemans, J. L., & Verbaten, M. N. Source analysis of the N2 in a cued Go/NoGo task. Cognitive Brain Research,2005,22,221-231.
[14]Bless, H., Betsch, T., & Franzen, A. Framing the framing effect:The impact of context cues on solutions to the' Asian disease' problem. European Journal of Social Psychology,1998,28,287-291.
[15]Blumenthal, A. A Wundt primer:the operating characteristics of consciousness. New York:Plenum,1980,121-144.
[16]Bodenhausen, G. V., Kramer, G. P., & Siisser, K. Happiness and stereotypic thinking in social judgment. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,1994, 66,621-632.
[17]Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., & Barch, D. M., et al. Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review,2001,108,624-652.
[18]Brandstatter, E., & Miicke, R. Interpreting test results. Personality and Individual Differences,2009,46(2),183-186.
[19]Braun, K. A., Gaeth, G. J., & Levin, I. P. Framing effects with differential impact: the role of attribute valence. Advances in Consumer Research,1997,24, 405-411.
[20]Breiter, H. C., Aharon, I., & Kahneman, D., et al. Functional imaging of neural responses to expectancy and experience of monetary gains and losses. Neuron, 2001,30(2),619-639.
[21]Brent, W. R. Chaos, crises and disasters:A strategic approach to crisis management in the tourism industry. Tourism Management,2004,25,669-683.
[22]Budescu, D. V., & Au, W. T. A model of sequential effects in common pool resource dilemmas. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,2002,15(1),37-63.
[23]Bush, G, Luu, P., & Posner, M. I. Cognitive and emotional influences in anterior cingulate cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,2000,4,215-222.
[24]Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D., & Schafer, W. D. Gender differences in risk taking:A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,1999,125(3),367-383.
[25]Cabanac, M. Pleasure:the common currency. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 1992,155,173-200.
[26]Cacioppo, J. T., & Gardner, W. L. Emotion. Annual Review of Psychology,1999, 50,191-214.
[27]Camerer, C., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. Neuroscience:How neuroscience can inform economics. Journal of Economic Literature,2005,43(1),9-64.
[28]Campanella, S., & Gaspard, C., & Debatisse, D., et al. Discrimination of emotional facial expressions in a visual oddball task:An ERP study. Biological Psychology,2002,59,171-186.
[29]Carretie, L., Hinojosa, J. A., & Mercado, J. A. F. Neural response to sustained affective visual stimulation using an indirect task. Experimental Brain Research, 2006,174,630-637.
[30]Carretie, L., Hinojosa, J. A., & Mercado, J. A. R, et al. Cortical response to subjectively unconscious danger. NeuroImage,2005,24,615-623.
[31]Carretie, L., Mercado, J. A. F, & Tapia, M., et al. Emotion, attention, and the 'negativity bias', studied through event-related potentials. International Journal of Psychophysiology,2001,41,75-85.
[32]Carter, C. S., Braver, T. S., & Barch, D. M., et al. Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance. Science,1998,280, 747-749.
[33]Chang, C. J., Yen, S. H., & Duh, R. R. An empirical examination of competing theories to explain the framing effect in accounting-related decisions. Behavioral Research in Accounting,2002,14(1),35-65.
[34]Chang, C. T. Interactive effects of message framing, product perceived risk, and mood---the case of travel healthcare product advertising. Journal of Advertising Research,2007,47(1),51-65.
[35]Chuang, S. C., & Lin, H. M. The effect of induced positive and negative emotion and openness-to-feeling in student's consumer decision making. Journal of Business Psychology,2007,22,65-78.
[36]David, M. L. A framework for integrated emergency management. Public Administration Review,1985,45,165-17.
[37]De Pascalis, V., Strelau, J., & Zawadzki, B. The effect of temperamental traits on event related potentials, heart rate and reaction time. Personality and Individual Differences,1999,26,441-465.
[38]Delplanque, S., Lavoie, M. E.,& Hot, P., et al. Modulation of cognitive processing by emotional valence studied through event-related potentials in humans. Neuroscience Letters,2004,356,1-4.
[39]Delplanque, S., Silvert, L., & Hot, P., et al. Event-related P3a and P3b in response to unpredictable emotional stimuli. Biological Psychology,2005,68, 107-120.
[40]De Martino, B., Kumaran, D., & Seymour. B., et al. Frames, biases, and rational decision-making in human brain. Science,2006,313(5787),684-687.
[41]Dolan, R. J. Emotion, cognition, and behavior. Science,2002,298(5596),1191.
[42]Donchin, E. Surprise!... Surprise? Psychophysiology,1981,18(5),493-513.
[43]Druckman, J. N. On the limits of framing effects:Who can frame me? The Journal of Politics,2001,63(4),1041-1066.
[44]Druckman, J. N., & McDermott, R. Emotion and the framing of risky choice, Political Behavior,2008,30,297-321.
[45]Duncan, J., Emsile, H., & Williams, P., et al. Intelligence and the frontal lobe:the organization of goal-directed behavior. Cognitive Psychology,1996,30(3), 257-303.
[46]Elster, J. Sadder but wiser? Rationality and the emotions. Social Science Information Sciences,1985,24,375-406.
[47]Evans, J. S. B. T. In two minds:Dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,2003,7(10),454-459.
[48]Fabiani, M., Gratton, G., & Federmeier, K. D. Event-related brain potentials: Methods, theory, and applications. New York:Cambridge University Press,2007, 85-119.
[49]Fagley, N. S., & Miller, P. M. The effects of decision framing on choice of risky vs certain options. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1987,39,264-277.
[50]Fagley, N. S., & Miller, P. M. Framing effects and arenas of choice:Your money or your life. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1997,71, 355-373.
[51]Fagley, N. S., Coleman, J. G., & Simon, A. Effects of framing, perspective taking, and perspective (affective focus) on choice. Personality and Individual Differences,2010,48,264-269.
[52]Fatas, E., Neugebauer, T., & Tamborero, P. How politicians make decisions:A political choice experiment. Journal of Economics,2007,92(2),167-196.
[53]Finucane, M. L., Alhakami, A., & Slovic, P., et al. The affect heuristic in judgments of risk and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,2000, 13(1),1-17.
[54]Fox, C. R., & Tversky, A. A belief-based account of decision under uncertainty. Management Science,1998,44(7),879-895.
[55]Fox, E., Russo, R., & Dutton, K. Attentional bias for threat:Evidence for delayed disengagement from emotional faces. Cognition and Emotion,2002,16(3), 355-379.
[56]Frederick, S. Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives,2005,19,25-42.
[57]Frisch, D. Reasons for framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1993,54,399-429.
[58]Gerend, M. A., & Cullen, M. Effects of message framing and temporal context on college student drinking behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2008,44(4),1167-1173.
[59]Gigerenzer, G., & Regier, T. How do we tell an association from a rule? Comment on Sloman (1996). Psychological Bulletin,1996,119,23-26.
[60]Gilbert, D. T. Thinking lightly about others:Automatic components of the social inference process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall,1989,189-211.
[61]Goldstein, A. K., Spencer, M., & Donchin, E. The influence of stimulus deviance and novelty on the P300 and novelty P3. Psychophysiology,2002,39,781-790.
[62]Gonzalez, C., Dana, J., & Koshino, H., et al. The framing effect and risky decisions:Examining cognitive functions with fMRI. Journal of Economic Psychology,2005,26,1-20.
[63]Hasseldine, J., & Hite, P. A. Framing, gender and tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology,2003,24,517-533.
[64]Heath, E. Key trends in destination marketing:Lessons from global "best practice" destinations. Ireland:Tourism Research Centre Dublin Institute of Technology,2000,123-135.
[65]Highhouse, S., & Paese, P. W. Problem domain and prospect frame:Choice under opportunity versus threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1996,22,124-132.
[66]Huang, Y. X., & Luo, Y. J. Temporal course of emotional negativity bias:An ERP study. Neuroscience Letters,2006,398,91-96.
[67]Igou, E. R., & Bless, H. On undesirable consequences of thinking:Framing effects as a function of substantive processing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,2007,20,125-142.
[68]Isen, A. M., & Patrick, R. The effects of positive feelings on risk taking:When the chips are down. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,1983, 31(2),194-202.
[69]Isen, A. M., Nygren, T. E. & Ashby, F. G. Influence of positive affect on the subjective utility of gains and losses:It is just not worth the risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1988,55(5),710-717.
[70]Jean, L. W., & Kathleen M. K. Command centers and emergency management support. Safety Science,1998,30,131-138.
[71]Johnson, E. J., & Tversky, A. Affect, generalization and the perception of risk. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,1983,45,20-31.
[72]Johnston, V. S., Miller, D. R., & Burleson, M. H. Multiple P3s to emotional stimuli and their theoretical significance. Psychophysiology,1986,23,684-694.
[73]Jou, J., Shanteau, J., & Harris, R. J. An information processing view of framing effects:The role of causal schemas in decision making. Memory & Cognition, 1996,24(1),1-15.
[74]Kahneman, D. Maps of bounded rationality:psychology for behavioral economics. The American Economic Review,2003,93(5),1149-1475.
[75]Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. In heuristics and biases:The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2002,49-81.
[76]Kavanagh, D. J., & Bower, G. H. Mood and self-efficacy:Impact of joy and sadness on perceived capabilities. Cognitive Therapy and Research,1985,9, 507-525.
[77]Keil, A., Bradley, M. M., & Hauk, O., et al. Large-scale neural correlates of affective picture processing. Psychophysiology,2002,39,641-649.
[78]Kiene, S. M., Barta, W. D., & Zelenski, J. M., et al. Why are you bringing up condoms now? The effect of message content on framing effects of condom use messages. Health Psychology,2005,24,321-326.
[79]Kilka, M., & Weber, M. What determines the shape of the probability weighting function under uncertainty. Management Science,2001,47(12),1712-1726.
[80]Klauer, K. C., Musch, J., & Eder, A. B. Priming of semantic classifications:Late and response related, or earlier and more central. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,2005,12,897-903.
[81]Knoch, D., Gianotti, L. R., & Pascual-Leone, A., et al. Disruption of right prefrontal cortex by low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation induces risk-taking behavior. Journal of Neuroscience,2006,26,6469-6472.
[82]Krishnamurthy, P., Carter, P., & Blair, E. Attribute framing and goal framing effects in health decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2001,85(2),382-399.
[83]Kiihberger, A. The framing of decisions:A new look at old problems. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1995,62,230-240.
[84]Kiihberger, A. The influence of framing on risky decisions:A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1998,75(1),23-55.
[85]Kuhberger, A., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Perner, J. The effects of framing, reflection, probability, and payoff on risk preference in choice tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1999,78(3),204-231.
[86]Kuhnen, C. M., & Knutson, B. The neural basis of financial risk-taking. Neuron, 2005,47,763-770.
[87]Kutas, M., McCarthy, G., & Donchin, E. Augmenting mental chronometry:the P300 as a measure of stimulus evaluation time. Science,1977,197,792-795.
[88]Kuvaas, B.,& Kaufmann, G. Impact of mood, framing, and need for cognition on decision makers'recall and confidence. Journal of Behavior Decision Making, 2004,17,59-74.
[89]Larrick, R. P., & Boles, T. L. Avoiding regret in decisions with feedback:A negotiation example. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1995,63,87-97.
[90]Larson, J. R. Exploring the external validity of a subjectively weighted utility model of decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1980,26(5),293-304.
[91]Lauriola, M., Russo, P., & Lucidi, F., et al. The role of personality in positively and negatively framed risky health decisions. Personality and Individual Differences,2005,38(1),45-59.
[92]Lerner, J. S., Han, S., & Keltner, D. feelings and consumer decision making: extending the appraisal-tendency framework. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2007,17(3),184-187.
[93]Lerner, J. S., Small, D. A., & Loewenstein, G. Heart strings and purse strings: Carryover effects of emotions on economic decisions. Psychological Science, 2004,15(5),337-341.
[94]Levin, I. P., & Gaeth, G. J. Framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. Journal of Consumer Research,1988,15,374-378.
[95]Levin, I. P., Gaeth, G. J., & Schreiber, J. et al. A new look at framing effects: Distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2002,88(1), 411-429.
[96]Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. All frames are not created equal:A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1998,76(2),149-188.
[97]Lewis, A., Carrera, S., & Cullis, J., et al. individual, cognitive and cultural differences in tax compliance:UK and Italy compared. Journal of Economic Psychology,2009,30,431-445.
[98]Li, X. Y., Li, X. B., & Luo, Y. J. Anxiety and attentional bias for threat:an event-related potential study. Neuroreport,2005,16(13),1501-1505.
[99]Loewenstein, G., & Lerner, J. S. The role of affect in decision making. New York: Oxford University Press,2003,619-642.
[100]Loewenstein, G, Weber, E., & Hsee, C. K., et al. Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin,2001,127(2),267-286.
[101]Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. Regret theory:An alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. Economic Journal,1982,92,805-824.
[102]Ma, Q. G, Wang, X. Y, & Dai, S. Y, et al. Event-related potential N270 correlates of brand extension. NeuroReport,2007,18(10),1031-1034.
[103]MacCrimmon, K. R., & Larsson, S. Utility theory:Axioms versus-Paradoxes. Holland:D. Reidel,1997,333-409.
[104]Mack, H., Birbaumer, N., & Kaps, H. P., et al. Motion and emotion:Emotion processing in quadriplegic patients and athletes. Zeitschriftfuer Medizinische Psychologie,20.05,14,159-166.
[105]Maguire, M., Brier, M. R., & Moore, P. S., et al. The influence of perceptual and semantic categorization on inhibitory processing as measured by the N2-P3 response. Brain and Cognition,2009,71,196-203.
[106]Martin, L. E., & Potts, G. F. Impulsivity in decision-making:An event-related potential investigation, Personality and Individual Differences,2009,46, 303-308.
[107]Mary, M. Intervention in the event of a radiation emergency:the basis for UK planning. Occupational Medicine,2006,56,180-186.
[108]Mayer, J. D., Gaschke, Y N., & Braverman, D. L., et al. Mood-congruent judgment is a general effect. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,1992, 63,119-132.
[109]Mayerowitz, B. E., & Chaiken, S. The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1987,52,500-510.
[110]McCarthy, G., & Donchin, E. A metric of thought:A comparison of P300 latency and reaction time. Science,1981,21,171-186.
[111]McElroy, T. & Conrad, J. Thinking about product attributes:Investigating the role of unconscious valence processing in attribute framing. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,2009,12(2),157-161.
[112]McElroy, T., & Seta, J. J. Framing effects:An analytic-holistic perspective. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,2003,39,610-617.
[113]McElroy, T., & Seta, J. J. On the other hand am I rational? Hemispheric activation and the framing effect. Brain and Cognition,2004,55,572-580.
[114]McElroy, T., & Seta, J. J. Framing the frame:How task goals determine the likelihood and direction of framing effects. Judgment and Decision Making, 2007,2(4),251-256.
[115]Mellers, B. A. Choice and the relative pleasure of consequences. Psychological Bulletin,2000,126,910-924.
[116]Mellers, B. A., Schwartz, A., & Ho, K., et al. Decision affect theory:Emotional reactions to the outcomes of risky options. Psychological Science,1997,8, 423-429.
[117]Mellers, B., Schwartz, A. & Ritov, I. Emotion-based choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology,1999,128(3),332-345.
[118]Mennes, M., Wouters, H., & Bergh, B. V. D., et al. ERP correlates of complex human decision making in a gambling paradigm:Detection and resolution of conflict, Psychophysiology,2008,45,714-720.
[119]Mercado, F., Carretie, L., & Tapia, M., et al. The influence of emotional context on attention in anxious subjects:Neurophysiological correlates. Journal of Anxiety Disorders,2006,20,72-84.
[120]Metaxian, J. P., Lesage, P., & Valette, B. Locating sources of volcanic tremor and emergent events by seismic triangulation:Application to Arenal volcano, Costa Rica. Journal of Geophysical Research,2002,107(10),101-108.
[121]Milch, K. F., Weber, E. U., & Appelt, K. C., et al. From individual preference construction to group decisions:Framing effects and group processes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2009,108,242-255.
[122]Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. K. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience,2001,24,167-202.
[123]Mittal, V., & Jr, W. T. R. The impact of positive and negative affect and issue framing on issue interpretation and risk taking. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1998,76(3),298-324.
[124]Naqvi, N., Shiv, B., & Bechara, A. The role of emotion in decision making. Current Directions in Psychological Science,2006,15,260-264.
[125]Neys, W. D. Dual processing in reasoning. Psychological Science,2006,17(5), 428-453.
[126]Nickerson, R. S. Confirmation bias:A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology,1998,2,175-220.
[127]Nieuwenhuis, S., Aston-Jones, G., & Cohen, J. D. Decision making, the P3, and the locus coeruleus-norepinephrine system. Psychological Bulletin,2005,131, 510-532.
[128]Nieuwenhuis, S., Yeung, N., & van den Wildenberg, W., et al. Electrophysiological correlates of anterior cingulate function in a go/no-go task: Effects of response conflict and trial type frequency. Cognitive, Affect, & Behavioral Neurosciencce,2003,3,17-26.
[129]O'Connor, D. B., Ferguson, E., & O'Connor, R. C. Intentions to use hormonal male contraception:The role of message framing, attitudes, and stress appraisals. British Journal of Psychology,2005,96,351-369.
[130]Orbell, S., & Hagger, M. Temporal framing and the decision to take part in type 2 diabetes screening:Effects of individual differences in consideration of future consequences on persuasion. Health Psychology,2006,25(4),537-548.
[131]Orbell, S., Perugini, M., & Rakow, T. Individual differences in sensitivity to health communications:Consideration of future consequences. Health Psychology,2004,23(4),388-396.
[132]Parsons, W. Crisis management. Career Development International,1996,1(5), 26-28.
[133]Paulus, M. P., Rogalsky, C., & Simmons, A., et al. Increased activation in the right insula during risk-taking decision making is related to harm avoidance and neuroticism. Neurolmage,2003,19,1439-1448.
[134]Peters, E., Vastfjall, D., & Garling, T., et al. Affect and decision making:A "hot" topic. Journal of Behavioral and Decision Making,2006,19,79-85.
[135]Pfister, H. R., & Bohm, G The function of concrete emotions in rational decision making. Acta Psychologica,1992,80,199-211.
[136]Pfister, H. R., & Bohm, G. The multiplicity of emotions:A framework of emotional functions in decision making. Judgment and Decision Making,2008, 3(1),5-17.
[137]Phelps, E. A. Emotion and cognition:Insights from studies on the human amygdale. Annual Review of Psychology,2006,57,27-53.
[138]Piuon, A., & Gambara, H. A meta-analytic review of framing effect:Risk, attribute and goal framing. Psicothema,2005,17(2),325-331.
[139]Platt, M. L., & Huettel, S. A. Risk business:the neuroeconomics of decision making under uncertainty. Nature Neuroscience,2008,11(4),398-403.
[140]Pochon, J., Riis, J., & Sanfey, A. G., et al. Functional imaging of decision conflict. Journal of Neuroscience,2008,28(13),3468-3474.
[141]Poldrack, R. A. Competition among multiple memory systems:converging evidence from animal and human brain studies. Neuropsychologia,2003,41, 245-251.
[142]Polezzi, D., Lotto, L., & Daum, I., et al. Predicting outcomes of decisions in the brain. Behavioral Brain Research,2008,187,116-122.
[143]Polezzi, D., Sartori, G, & Rumiati, R., et al. Brain correlates of risky decision-making, NeuroImage,2010,49,1886-1894.
[144]Powell, M., & Ansic, D. Gender differences in risk behavior in financial decision-making:An experimental analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 1997,18,605-628.
[145]Qin, J, G., & Han, S. H. Neurocognitive mechanisms underlying identification of environmental risks. Neuropsychologia,2009,47,397-405.
[146]Qin, J. L., Xiao, F., & Li, F., et al. The characteristic of extrapolation in numerical inductive inference:An ERP study. Brain Research,2009,1295, 142-148.
[147]Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. Fuzzy-trace theory and children's acquisition of mathematical and scientific concepts. Learning and Individual Differences, 1991,3,27-59.
[148]Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in choice: Gist extraction, truncation, and conversion. Journal of Behavior Decision Making,1991,4,249-262.
[149]Ridderinkhof, K. R., Ullsperger, M., & Crone, E. A., et al. The role of the medial frontal cortex in cognitive control. Science,2004,306,443-447.
[150]Roberts, V. Flood management:Bradford paper. Disaster Prevention and Management,1994,3(3),44-60.
[151]Roiser, J. R., Martino, B. D., & Tan, G. C. Y, et al. A genetically mediated bias in decision making driven by failure of amygdala control. The Journal of Neuroscience,2009,29(18),5985-5991.
[152]Ronnlund, M. Karlsson, E., & Laggnas, E., et al. Risky decision making across three arenas of choice:Are younger and older adults differently susceptible to framing effects? The Journal of General Psychology,2005,132(1),81-93.
[153]Rothman, A. J., Salovey, P., & Antone, C., et al. The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,1993,29,408-433.
[154]Rozin, P., & Nemeroff, C. Sympathetic magical thinking:The contagion and similarity heuristics. New York:Cambridge University Press,2002,201-216.
[155]Rugg, M. D., & Nagy, M. E. Lexical contribution to non-word repetition effects: Evidence from event-related potentials. Memory and Cognition,1987,15, 473-481.
[156]Russell, J. A. Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review,2003,110,145-172.
[157]Rustichini, A. Neuroeconomics:Present and future. Games and Economic Behavior,2005,52(2),201-212.
[158]Sanfey, A. G., & Chang, L. J. Multiple systems in decision making. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,2008,1128,53-62.
[159]Satpute, A. B. Integrating automatic and controlled processes into neurocognitive models of social cognition. Brain Research,2006,1079,86-97.
[160]Schneider, S. L. Framing and conflict:Aspiration level contingency, the status quo, and current theories of risky choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,1992,18,1040-1057.
[161]Schneider, S. L., & Lopes, L. L. Reflection in preferences under risk:Who and when may suggest why. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,1986,12,535-548.
[162]Schneider, W. Controlled & automatic processing:Behavior, theory, and biological-mechanisms. Cognition Science,2003,27,525-559.
[163]Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. Controlled and automatic human information processing:Detection, search, attention. Psychological Review,1977,84,1-66.
[164]Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. Mood, misattribution and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,1983,45,513-523.
[165]Shafir, E. Uncertainty and the difficulty of thinking through disjunctions. Cognition,1994,50,403-430.
[166]Shafir, E., Simonson, I., & Tversky, A. Reason-based choice. Cognition,1993, 49,11-36.
[167]Simon, A. F., Fagley, N. S., & Halleran, J. G. Decision framing:Moderating effects of individual differences and cognitive processing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,2004,17,77-93.
[168]Sloman, S. A. The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin,1996,119,3-22.
[169]Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. Why study risk perception? Risk Analysis,1982,2(2),83-95.
[170]Smith, E. E., & Jonides, J. Storage and executive process in the frontal lobes. Science,1999,283,1657-1661.
[171]Smolensky, P. On the proper treatment of connectionism. Behavioral and Brain Science,1988,11,1-23.
[172]Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behavior and Brain Science,2000,23, 645-726.
[173]Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2008,94 (4),672-695.
[174]Steul, M. Does the framing of investment portfolios influence risk-taking behavior? Some experimental results. Journal of Economic Psychology,2008, 27(4),557-570.
[175]Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., & Boninger, D. S., et al. The consideration of future consequences:Weighting immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1994,66(4),742-752.
[176]Sunghwan, Y., & Baumgartner, H. Motivational compatibility and the role of anticipated feelings in positively valenced persuasive message framing. Psychology & Marketing,2008,25 (11),1007-1026.
[177]Sutton, S., Braren, M., & Zubin, J., et al. Evoked-potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty, Science,1965,150(3700),1187-1188.
[178]Sweeny, K. Crisis decision theory:Decision in the face of negative events. Psychological Bulletin,2008,134(1),61-76.
[179]Takemura, K. Influence of elaboration on the framing of decision. The Journal of Psychology,1994,128,33-39.
[180]Tetlock, P. E. Study on judgment and choice:People as politcians. Theory & Psychology,1991,1(4),451-475.
[181]Toda, M. Emotion and decision making. Acta Psychologica,1980,45,133-155.
[182]Toll, B. A., Salovey, P., & O'Malley S. S., et al. Message framing for smoking cessation:The interaction of risk perceptions and gender. Nicotine & Tobacco, 2008,10(1),195-200.
[183]Tom, S. M., Fox, C. R., & Trepel, C., et al. The neural basis of loss aversion in decision-making under risk. Science,2007,313,515-518.
[184]Tversky, A., & Kahnemen, D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science,1981,211(4481),453-458.
[185]Van Veen, V., & Carter, C. S. The anterior cingulate as a conflict monitor:fMRI and ERP studies. Physiology & Behavior,2002,77,477-482.
[186]Vreese, C. H. D.,& Kandyla, A. News framing and public support for a common foreign and security policy. Journal of Common Market Studies,2009, 47 (3),453-481.
[187]Wagenaar, W. A., Keren, G., & Lichtenstein, S. Islands and hostages:Deep and surface structures of decision problems. Acta Psychologica,1988,67,175-189.
[188]Wang, X. T. Framing effects:Dynamics and task domains. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1996,68(2),145-157.
[189]Wang, X. T.,& Johnston, V. S. Perceived social context and risk preference:A reexamination of framing effects in a life-death decision problem. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,1995,8,279-293.
[190]Wang, X. T., Simons, F., & Bredart, S. Social cues and verbal framing in risky choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,2001,14,1-15.
[191]Winkielman, P., Knutson, B., & Paulus, M., et al. Affective influence on judgments and decisions:Moving towards core mechanisms. Review of General Psychology,2007,11(2),179-192.
[192]Wright, W. F., & Bower, G. H. Mood effects on subjective probability assessment. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes,1992,52, 276-291.
[193]Yang, J., Li, H., & Zhang, Y., et al. The neural basis of risky decision-making in a blackjack task, Neuroreport,2007,18(14),1507-1510.
[194]Yuan, J. J., Zhang, Q. L., & Chen, A. T., et al. Are we sensitive to valence differences in emotionally negative stimuli? Electrophysiological evidence from an ERP study. Neuropsychologia,2007,45,2764-2771.
[195]Zeelenberg, M., & Pieters, R. Feeling is for doing:A pragmatic approach to the study of emotions in economic behavior. Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum,2006, 117-137.
[196]Zhang, Y. L., & Miao, D. M. Social cues and framing effects in risky decisions among Chinese military students. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,2008, 11(3),241-246.
[197]Zhang, Y. L., Xiao, L. J., & Ma, Y., et al. Effect of framing on risky choice:One case study in China. Social Behavior and Personality,2008,36 (5),651-658.
[198]陈远章.转型期中国突发事件社会风险管理研究.博士学位论文,中南大学,2009.
[199]段锦云,曹忠良,娄玮瑜.框架效应及其认知机制的研究进展.应用心理学,2008,14(4),378-384.
[200]段锦云.基于认知惰性的创业风险决策框架效应双维认知机制研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2008.
[201]范秀成,张运来.情感影响冲动性购买的机制研究.社会科学家,2006(2),148-151.
[202]高利苹,李纾,时勘.从对框架效应的分析看风险决策的神经基础.心理科学进展,2006,14(6),859-865.
[203]何贵兵,梁社红,刘剑.风险偏好预测中的性别差异和框架效应.应用心理学,2002,8(4),19-23.
[204]何媛媛,袁加锦,伍泽莲等.正性情绪刺激效价强度的变化对外倾个体注意的调制作用.心理学报,2008,40(11),1158-1164.
[205]黄玮,余嘉元.高三学生在正、负框架下风险偏好的研究.江苏教育学院学报,2008,24(1),32-35.
[206]李胜明,李昊,赵晓玲.框架效应下优秀运动员风险决策偏好研究.成都体育学院学报,2009,35(3),32-35.
[207]李纾.发展中的行为决策研究.心理科学进展,2006,14(4),490-496.
[208]梁哲,许洁虹,李纾等.突发公共安全事件的风险沟通难题—从心理学角度的观察.自然灾害学报,2008,17(2),25-30.
[209]刘涵慧,周洪雨,车宏生.时间压力、个人相关性对不同类型框架下决策的影响.心理学探新,2008,28(108),27-30.
[210]刘咏梅,胡尊爽.沟通技术和时间因素对虚拟团队过程影响实验研究.管理科学,2009,22(3),47-56.
[211]罗跃嘉,黄宇霞,李新影等.情绪对认知加工的影响：事件相关脑电位系列研究.心理科学进展,2006,14(4),505-510.
[212]马庆国,王小毅.非常规突发事件中影响当事人状态的要素分析与数理描述.管理工程学报,2009,23(3),126-130.
[213]马庆国,王小毅.认知神经科学、神经经济学与神经管理学.管理世界,2006,10,139-149.
[214]舒良超.基于决策神经科学的不确定决策机理研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2009.
[215]孙多勇.突发性社会公共危机事件下个体与群体行为决策研究.博士学位论文,国防科学技术大学,2005.
[216]王海忠,陈增祥,尹露.公司信息的纵向与横向溢出效应：公司品牌与产品品牌组合视角.南开管理评论,2009,12(1),84-89.
[217]王云芳.公共危机决策中的非理性因素分析.行政论坛,2006(5),54-56.
[218]王湛.突发公共事件应急管理过程及能力评价研究.博士学位论文,武汉理工大学,2008.
[219]薛澜,钟开斌.突发公共事件分类、分级与分期：应急体制的管理基础.中国行政管理,2005(2),102-107.
[220]岳珍珠,张德玄,王岩.冲突控制的神经机制.心理科学进展,2004,12(5),651-660.
[221]曾守锤,李其维.模糊痕迹理论：对经典认知发展理论的挑战.心理科学,2004,27(2),489-492.
[222]张成福.公共危机管理：全面整合的模式与中国的战略选择.中国行政管理,2003(7),6-11.
[223]张凤华,邱江,邱桂凤等.决策中的框架效应再探.心理科学,2007,30(4),886-890.
[224]张江华,刘治平,朱道立.多源点突发灾害事故应急疏散模型与算法.管理科学学报,2009,12(3),111-118.
[225]张江华.突发公共事件应急管理研究—以危险化学品事故为例.博士学位 论文,复旦大学,2008.
[226]张文慧,王晓田.自我框架、风险认知和风险选择.心理学报,2008,40(6),633-641.
[227]张银玲,苗丹民,孙云峰.框架效应对军校大学生决策判断的影响.中国行为医学科学,2006,15(2),155-156.
[228]周祖木,林丹,魏晶娇等.温州市2004-2007年突发公共卫生事件及其影响因素分析.中国预防医学杂志,2009,10(12),1088-1090.
1项目名称：基于神经管理学的非常规突发事件下“氛围-个体-群体”与“生理-心理-行为”多层耦合规律和组合干预研究,编号为90924304
1引自中华人民共和国国务院于2008年9月19日编制的《汶川地震灾后恢复重建总体规划》第一章第二节
2北京经济信息网(http://www.beinet.net.cn/sydh/szyw/200809/t271097.htm)
3数据来源：国家安全生产监督管理总局政府网站事故查询系统
4中华人民共和国中央人民政府网站(http://www.gov.cn/yjgl/2005-08/09/content_21394.htm)
5参见2009年7月14日中华人民共和国外交部例行记者会外交部新闻发言人秦刚答记者问实录(http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/chn/gxh/tyb/fyrbt/jzhsl/t572909.htm)
1引自2010年中央政府工作报告(温家宝,2010年3月5日)
1转引自：薛澜,钟开斌.突发公共事件分类、分级与分期：应急体制的管理基础.中国行政管理,2005(2),102-107.
2转引自：薛澜,钟开斌.突发公共事件分类、分级与分期：应急体制的管理基础.中国行政管理,2005(2),102-107.
3转引自：薛澜,钟开斌.突发公共事件分类、分级与分期：应急体制的管理基础.中国行政管理,2005(2),102-107.
1香港《大公报》,2010年1月5日报道,原文题目为《中国部委高官年初密集调整》(http://www.takungpao.com:82/gate/gb/www.takungpao.com/news/10/01/05/renshi_xiangguan-1196577.htm)
[2]Albert, J., Lopez-Martin, S., & Carretie, L. Emotional context modulates response inhibition:Neural and behavioral data. NeuroImage,2010,49,914-921.
[3]Arkes, H. R., Herren, L. T., & Isen, A. M. The role of potential loss in the influence of affect on decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1988,47,181-193.
[4]Ashby, G. F., Alfonso-Reese, L. A., & Turken, U., et al. A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning. Psychological Review,1998, 195,442-451.
[5]Barbara, R., & Matthew W. S. Crisis and emergency risk communication as an integrative model. Journal of Health Communication,2005,10,43-55.
[6]Baron, J. The effect of normative beliefs on anticipated emotions. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,1992,63,320-330.
[7]Baron, J. Nonconsequentialist decisions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,1994, 17,1-42.
[8]Barrett, L. F. Valence as a basic building block of emotional life. Journal of Research in Personality,2006,40,35-55.
[9]Bartholow, B. D., Riordan, M. A., & Saults, J. S., et al. Psychophysiological evidence of response conflict and strategic control of responses in affective priming. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,2009,45,655-666.
[10]Bateman, C. R., Fraedrich, J. P., & Iyer, R. Framing effects within the ethical decision making process of consumers. Journal of Business Ethics,2002,36(1), 119-140.
[11]Bechara, A., & Damasio, A. R. The somatic marker hypothesis:A neural theory of economic decision. Games and Economic Behavior,2005,52,336-372.
[12]Becker, S. W., & Brownson, F. O. What price ambiguity? Or the role of ambiguity in decision-making. Journal of Political Economy,1964,72(1),62-73.
[13]Bekker, E. M., Kenemans, J. L., & Verbaten, M. N. Source analysis of the N2 in a cued Go/NoGo task. Cognitive Brain Research,2005,22,221-231.
[14]Bless, H., Betsch, T., & Franzen, A. Framing the framing effect:The impact of context cues on solutions to the' Asian disease' problem. European Journal of Social Psychology,1998,28,287-291.
[15]Blumenthal, A. A Wundt primer:the operating characteristics of consciousness. New York:Plenum,1980,121-144.
[16]Bodenhausen, G. V., Kramer, G. P., & Siisser, K. Happiness and stereotypic thinking in social judgment. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,1994, 66,621-632.
[17]Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., & Barch, D. M., et al. Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review,2001,108,624-652.
[18]Brandstatter, E., & Miicke, R. Interpreting test results. Personality and Individual Differences,2009,46(2),183-186.
[19]Braun, K. A., Gaeth, G. J., & Levin, I. P. Framing effects with differential impact: the role of attribute valence. Advances in Consumer Research,1997,24, 405-411.
[20]Breiter, H. C., Aharon, I., & Kahneman, D., et al. Functional imaging of neural responses to expectancy and experience of monetary gains and losses. Neuron, 2001,30(2),619-639.
[21]Brent, W. R. Chaos, crises and disasters:A strategic approach to crisis management in the tourism industry. Tourism Management,2004,25,669-683.
[22]Budescu, D. V., & Au, W. T. A model of sequential effects in common pool resource dilemmas. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,2002,15(1),37-63.
[23]Bush, G, Luu, P., & Posner, M. I. Cognitive and emotional influences in anterior cingulate cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,2000,4,215-222.
[24]Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D., & Schafer, W. D. Gender differences in risk taking:A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,1999,125(3),367-383.
[25]Cabanac, M. Pleasure:the common currency. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 1992,155,173-200.
[26]Cacioppo, J. T., & Gardner, W. L. Emotion. Annual Review of Psychology,1999, 50,191-214.
[27]Camerer, C., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. Neuroscience:How neuroscience can inform economics. Journal of Economic Literature,2005,43(1),9-64.
[28]Campanella, S., & Gaspard, C., & Debatisse, D., et al. Discrimination of emotional facial expressions in a visual oddball task:An ERP study. Biological Psychology,2002,59,171-186.
[29]Carretie, L., Hinojosa, J. A., & Mercado, J. A. F. Neural response to sustained affective visual stimulation using an indirect task. Experimental Brain Research, 2006,174,630-637.
[30]Carretie, L., Hinojosa, J. A., & Mercado, J. A. R, et al. Cortical response to subjectively unconscious danger. NeuroImage,2005,24,615-623.
[31]Carretie, L., Mercado, J. A. F, & Tapia, M., et al. Emotion, attention, and the 'negativity bias', studied through event-related potentials. International Journal of Psychophysiology,2001,41,75-85.
[32]Carter, C. S., Braver, T. S., & Barch, D. M., et al. Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance. Science,1998,280, 747-749.
[33]Chang, C. J., Yen, S. H., & Duh, R. R. An empirical examination of competing theories to explain the framing effect in accounting-related decisions. Behavioral Research in Accounting,2002,14(1),35-65.
[34]Chang, C. T. Interactive effects of message framing, product perceived risk, and mood---the case of travel healthcare product advertising. Journal of Advertising Research,2007,47(1),51-65.
[35]Chuang, S. C., & Lin, H. M. The effect of induced positive and negative emotion and openness-to-feeling in student's consumer decision making. Journal of Business Psychology,2007,22,65-78.
[36]David, M. L. A framework for integrated emergency management. Public Administration Review,1985,45,165-17.
[37]De Pascalis, V., Strelau, J., & Zawadzki, B. The effect of temperamental traits on event related potentials, heart rate and reaction time. Personality and Individual Differences,1999,26,441-465.
[38]Delplanque, S., Lavoie, M. E.,& Hot, P., et al. Modulation of cognitive processing by emotional valence studied through event-related potentials in humans. Neuroscience Letters,2004,356,1-4.
[39]Delplanque, S., Silvert, L., & Hot, P., et al. Event-related P3a and P3b in response to unpredictable emotional stimuli. Biological Psychology,2005,68, 107-120.
[40]De Martino, B., Kumaran, D., & Seymour. B., et al. Frames, biases, and rational decision-making in human brain. Science,2006,313(5787),684-687.
[41]Dolan, R. J. Emotion, cognition, and behavior. Science,2002,298(5596),1191.
[42]Donchin, E. Surprise!... Surprise? Psychophysiology,1981,18(5),493-513.
[43]Druckman, J. N. On the limits of framing effects:Who can frame me? The Journal of Politics,2001,63(4),1041-1066.
[44]Druckman, J. N., & McDermott, R. Emotion and the framing of risky choice, Political Behavior,2008,30,297-321.
[45]Duncan, J., Emsile, H., & Williams, P., et al. Intelligence and the frontal lobe:the organization of goal-directed behavior. Cognitive Psychology,1996,30(3), 257-303.
[46]Elster, J. Sadder but wiser? Rationality and the emotions. Social Science Information Sciences,1985,24,375-406.
[47]Evans, J. S. B. T. In two minds:Dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,2003,7(10),454-459.
[48]Fabiani, M., Gratton, G., & Federmeier, K. D. Event-related brain potentials: Methods, theory, and applications. New York:Cambridge University Press,2007, 85-119.
[49]Fagley, N. S., & Miller, P. M. The effects of decision framing on choice of risky vs certain options. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1987,39,264-277.
[50]Fagley, N. S., & Miller, P. M. Framing effects and arenas of choice:Your money or your life. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1997,71, 355-373.
[51]Fagley, N. S., Coleman, J. G., & Simon, A. Effects of framing, perspective taking, and perspective (affective focus) on choice. Personality and Individual Differences,2010,48,264-269.
[52]Fatas, E., Neugebauer, T., & Tamborero, P. How politicians make decisions:A political choice experiment. Journal of Economics,2007,92(2),167-196.
[53]Finucane, M. L., Alhakami, A., & Slovic, P., et al. The affect heuristic in judgments of risk and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,2000, 13(1),1-17.
[54]Fox, C. R., & Tversky, A. A belief-based account of decision under uncertainty. Management Science,1998,44(7),879-895.
[55]Fox, E., Russo, R., & Dutton, K. Attentional bias for threat:Evidence for delayed disengagement from emotional faces. Cognition and Emotion,2002,16(3), 355-379.
[56]Frederick, S. Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives,2005,19,25-42.
[57]Frisch, D. Reasons for framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1993,54,399-429.
[58]Gerend, M. A., & Cullen, M. Effects of message framing and temporal context on college student drinking behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2008,44(4),1167-1173.
[59]Gigerenzer, G., & Regier, T. How do we tell an association from a rule? Comment on Sloman (1996). Psychological Bulletin,1996,119,23-26.
[60]Gilbert, D. T. Thinking lightly about others:Automatic components of the social inference process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall,1989,189-211.
[61]Goldstein, A. K., Spencer, M., & Donchin, E. The influence of stimulus deviance and novelty on the P300 and novelty P3. Psychophysiology,2002,39,781-790.
[62]Gonzalez, C., Dana, J., & Koshino, H., et al. The framing effect and risky decisions:Examining cognitive functions with fMRI. Journal of Economic Psychology,2005,26,1-20.
[63]Hasseldine, J., & Hite, P. A. Framing, gender and tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology,2003,24,517-533.
[64]Heath, E. Key trends in destination marketing:Lessons from global "best practice" destinations. Ireland:Tourism Research Centre Dublin Institute of Technology,2000,123-135.
[65]Highhouse, S., & Paese, P. W. Problem domain and prospect frame:Choice under opportunity versus threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1996,22,124-132.
[66]Huang, Y. X., & Luo, Y. J. Temporal course of emotional negativity bias:An ERP study. Neuroscience Letters,2006,398,91-96.
[67]Igou, E. R., & Bless, H. On undesirable consequences of thinking:Framing effects as a function of substantive processing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,2007,20,125-142.
[68]Isen, A. M., & Patrick, R. The effects of positive feelings on risk taking:When the chips are down. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,1983, 31(2),194-202.
[69]Isen, A. M., Nygren, T. E. & Ashby, F. G. Influence of positive affect on the subjective utility of gains and losses:It is just not worth the risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1988,55(5),710-717.
[70]Jean, L. W., & Kathleen M. K. Command centers and emergency management support. Safety Science,1998,30,131-138.
[71]Johnson, E. J., & Tversky, A. Affect, generalization and the perception of risk. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,1983,45,20-31.
[72]Johnston, V. S., Miller, D. R., & Burleson, M. H. Multiple P3s to emotional stimuli and their theoretical significance. Psychophysiology,1986,23,684-694.
[73]Jou, J., Shanteau, J., & Harris, R. J. An information processing view of framing effects:The role of causal schemas in decision making. Memory & Cognition, 1996,24(1),1-15.
[74]Kahneman, D. Maps of bounded rationality:psychology for behavioral economics. The American Economic Review,2003,93(5),1149-1475.
[75]Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. In heuristics and biases:The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2002,49-81.
[76]Kavanagh, D. J., & Bower, G. H. Mood and self-efficacy:Impact of joy and sadness on perceived capabilities. Cognitive Therapy and Research,1985,9, 507-525.
[77]Keil, A., Bradley, M. M., & Hauk, O., et al. Large-scale neural correlates of affective picture processing. Psychophysiology,2002,39,641-649.
[78]Kiene, S. M., Barta, W. D., & Zelenski, J. M., et al. Why are you bringing up condoms now? The effect of message content on framing effects of condom use messages. Health Psychology,2005,24,321-326.
[79]Kilka, M., & Weber, M. What determines the shape of the probability weighting function under uncertainty. Management Science,2001,47(12),1712-1726.
[80]Klauer, K. C., Musch, J., & Eder, A. B. Priming of semantic classifications:Late and response related, or earlier and more central. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,2005,12,897-903.
[81]Knoch, D., Gianotti, L. R., & Pascual-Leone, A., et al. Disruption of right prefrontal cortex by low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation induces risk-taking behavior. Journal of Neuroscience,2006,26,6469-6472.
[82]Krishnamurthy, P., Carter, P., & Blair, E. Attribute framing and goal framing effects in health decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2001,85(2),382-399.
[83]Kiihberger, A. The framing of decisions:A new look at old problems. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1995,62,230-240.
[84]Kiihberger, A. The influence of framing on risky decisions:A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1998,75(1),23-55.
[85]Kuhberger, A., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Perner, J. The effects of framing, reflection, probability, and payoff on risk preference in choice tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1999,78(3),204-231.
[86]Kuhnen, C. M., & Knutson, B. The neural basis of financial risk-taking. Neuron, 2005,47,763-770.
[87]Kutas, M., McCarthy, G., & Donchin, E. Augmenting mental chronometry:the P300 as a measure of stimulus evaluation time. Science,1977,197,792-795.
[88]Kuvaas, B.,& Kaufmann, G. Impact of mood, framing, and need for cognition on decision makers'recall and confidence. Journal of Behavior Decision Making, 2004,17,59-74.
[89]Larrick, R. P., & Boles, T. L. Avoiding regret in decisions with feedback:A negotiation example. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1995,63,87-97.
[90]Larson, J. R. Exploring the external validity of a subjectively weighted utility model of decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1980,26(5),293-304.
[91]Lauriola, M., Russo, P., & Lucidi, F., et al. The role of personality in positively and negatively framed risky health decisions. Personality and Individual Differences,2005,38(1),45-59.
[92]Lerner, J. S., Han, S., & Keltner, D. feelings and consumer decision making: extending the appraisal-tendency framework. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2007,17(3),184-187.
[93]Lerner, J. S., Small, D. A., & Loewenstein, G. Heart strings and purse strings: Carryover effects of emotions on economic decisions. Psychological Science, 2004,15(5),337-341.
[94]Levin, I. P., & Gaeth, G. J. Framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. Journal of Consumer Research,1988,15,374-378.
[95]Levin, I. P., Gaeth, G. J., & Schreiber, J. et al. A new look at framing effects: Distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2002,88(1), 411-429.
[96]Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. All frames are not created equal:A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1998,76(2),149-188.
[97]Lewis, A., Carrera, S., & Cullis, J., et al. individual, cognitive and cultural differences in tax compliance:UK and Italy compared. Journal of Economic Psychology,2009,30,431-445.
[98]Li, X. Y., Li, X. B., & Luo, Y. J. Anxiety and attentional bias for threat:an event-related potential study. Neuroreport,2005,16(13),1501-1505.
[99]Loewenstein, G., & Lerner, J. S. The role of affect in decision making. New York: Oxford University Press,2003,619-642.
[100]Loewenstein, G, Weber, E., & Hsee, C. K., et al. Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin,2001,127(2),267-286.
[101]Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. Regret theory:An alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. Economic Journal,1982,92,805-824.
[102]Ma, Q. G, Wang, X. Y, & Dai, S. Y, et al. Event-related potential N270 correlates of brand extension. NeuroReport,2007,18(10),1031-1034.
[103]MacCrimmon, K. R., & Larsson, S. Utility theory:Axioms versus-Paradoxes. Holland:D. Reidel,1997,333-409.
[104]Mack, H., Birbaumer, N., & Kaps, H. P., et al. Motion and emotion:Emotion processing in quadriplegic patients and athletes. Zeitschriftfuer Medizinische Psychologie,20.05,14,159-166.
[105]Maguire, M., Brier, M. R., & Moore, P. S., et al. The influence of perceptual and semantic categorization on inhibitory processing as measured by the N2-P3 response. Brain and Cognition,2009,71,196-203.
[106]Martin, L. E., & Potts, G. F. Impulsivity in decision-making:An event-related potential investigation, Personality and Individual Differences,2009,46, 303-308.
[107]Mary, M. Intervention in the event of a radiation emergency:the basis for UK planning. Occupational Medicine,2006,56,180-186.
[108]Mayer, J. D., Gaschke, Y N., & Braverman, D. L., et al. Mood-congruent judgment is a general effect. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,1992, 63,119-132.
[109]Mayerowitz, B. E., & Chaiken, S. The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1987,52,500-510.
[110]McCarthy, G., & Donchin, E. A metric of thought:A comparison of P300 latency and reaction time. Science,1981,21,171-186.
[111]McElroy, T. & Conrad, J. Thinking about product attributes:Investigating the role of unconscious valence processing in attribute framing. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,2009,12(2),157-161.
[112]McElroy, T., & Seta, J. J. Framing effects:An analytic-holistic perspective. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,2003,39,610-617.
[113]McElroy, T., & Seta, J. J. On the other hand am I rational? Hemispheric activation and the framing effect. Brain and Cognition,2004,55,572-580.
[114]McElroy, T., & Seta, J. J. Framing the frame:How task goals determine the likelihood and direction of framing effects. Judgment and Decision Making, 2007,2(4),251-256.
[115]Mellers, B. A. Choice and the relative pleasure of consequences. Psychological Bulletin,2000,126,910-924.
[116]Mellers, B. A., Schwartz, A., & Ho, K., et al. Decision affect theory:Emotional reactions to the outcomes of risky options. Psychological Science,1997,8, 423-429.
[117]Mellers, B., Schwartz, A. & Ritov, I. Emotion-based choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology,1999,128(3),332-345.
[118]Mennes, M., Wouters, H., & Bergh, B. V. D., et al. ERP correlates of complex human decision making in a gambling paradigm:Detection and resolution of conflict, Psychophysiology,2008,45,714-720.
[119]Mercado, F., Carretie, L., & Tapia, M., et al. The influence of emotional context on attention in anxious subjects:Neurophysiological correlates. Journal of Anxiety Disorders,2006,20,72-84.
[120]Metaxian, J. P., Lesage, P., & Valette, B. Locating sources of volcanic tremor and emergent events by seismic triangulation:Application to Arenal volcano, Costa Rica. Journal of Geophysical Research,2002,107(10),101-108.
[121]Milch, K. F., Weber, E. U., & Appelt, K. C., et al. From individual preference construction to group decisions:Framing effects and group processes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2009,108,242-255.
[122]Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. K. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience,2001,24,167-202.
[123]Mittal, V., & Jr, W. T. R. The impact of positive and negative affect and issue framing on issue interpretation and risk taking. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1998,76(3),298-324.
[124]Naqvi, N., Shiv, B., & Bechara, A. The role of emotion in decision making. Current Directions in Psychological Science,2006,15,260-264.
[125]Neys, W. D. Dual processing in reasoning. Psychological Science,2006,17(5), 428-453.
[126]Nickerson, R. S. Confirmation bias:A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology,1998,2,175-220.
[127]Nieuwenhuis, S., Aston-Jones, G., & Cohen, J. D. Decision making, the P3, and the locus coeruleus-norepinephrine system. Psychological Bulletin,2005,131, 510-532.
[128]Nieuwenhuis, S., Yeung, N., & van den Wildenberg, W., et al. Electrophysiological correlates of anterior cingulate function in a go/no-go task: Effects of response conflict and trial type frequency. Cognitive, Affect, & Behavioral Neurosciencce,2003,3,17-26.
[129]O'Connor, D. B., Ferguson, E., & O'Connor, R. C. Intentions to use hormonal male contraception:The role of message framing, attitudes, and stress appraisals. British Journal of Psychology,2005,96,351-369.
[130]Orbell, S., & Hagger, M. Temporal framing and the decision to take part in type 2 diabetes screening:Effects of individual differences in consideration of future consequences on persuasion. Health Psychology,2006,25(4),537-548.
[131]Orbell, S., Perugini, M., & Rakow, T. Individual differences in sensitivity to health communications:Consideration of future consequences. Health Psychology,2004,23(4),388-396.
[132]Parsons, W. Crisis management. Career Development International,1996,1(5), 26-28.
[133]Paulus, M. P., Rogalsky, C., & Simmons, A., et al. Increased activation in the right insula during risk-taking decision making is related to harm avoidance and neuroticism. Neurolmage,2003,19,1439-1448.
[134]Peters, E., Vastfjall, D., & Garling, T., et al. Affect and decision making:A "hot" topic. Journal of Behavioral and Decision Making,2006,19,79-85.
[135]Pfister, H. R., & Bohm, G The function of concrete emotions in rational decision making. Acta Psychologica,1992,80,199-211.
[136]Pfister, H. R., & Bohm, G. The multiplicity of emotions:A framework of emotional functions in decision making. Judgment and Decision Making,2008, 3(1),5-17.
[137]Phelps, E. A. Emotion and cognition:Insights from studies on the human amygdale. Annual Review of Psychology,2006,57,27-53.
[138]Piuon, A., & Gambara, H. A meta-analytic review of framing effect:Risk, attribute and goal framing. Psicothema,2005,17(2),325-331.
[139]Platt, M. L., & Huettel, S. A. Risk business:the neuroeconomics of decision making under uncertainty. Nature Neuroscience,2008,11(4),398-403.
[140]Pochon, J., Riis, J., & Sanfey, A. G., et al. Functional imaging of decision conflict. Journal of Neuroscience,2008,28(13),3468-3474.
[141]Poldrack, R. A. Competition among multiple memory systems:converging evidence from animal and human brain studies. Neuropsychologia,2003,41, 245-251.
[142]Polezzi, D., Lotto, L., & Daum, I., et al. Predicting outcomes of decisions in the brain. Behavioral Brain Research,2008,187,116-122.
[143]Polezzi, D., Sartori, G, & Rumiati, R., et al. Brain correlates of risky decision-making, NeuroImage,2010,49,1886-1894.
[144]Powell, M., & Ansic, D. Gender differences in risk behavior in financial decision-making:An experimental analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 1997,18,605-628.
[145]Qin, J, G., & Han, S. H. Neurocognitive mechanisms underlying identification of environmental risks. Neuropsychologia,2009,47,397-405.
[146]Qin, J. L., Xiao, F., & Li, F., et al. The characteristic of extrapolation in numerical inductive inference:An ERP study. Brain Research,2009,1295, 142-148.
[147]Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. Fuzzy-trace theory and children's acquisition of mathematical and scientific concepts. Learning and Individual Differences, 1991,3,27-59.
[148]Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in choice: Gist extraction, truncation, and conversion. Journal of Behavior Decision Making,1991,4,249-262.
[149]Ridderinkhof, K. R., Ullsperger, M., & Crone, E. A., et al. The role of the medial frontal cortex in cognitive control. Science,2004,306,443-447.
[150]Roberts, V. Flood management:Bradford paper. Disaster Prevention and Management,1994,3(3),44-60.
[151]Roiser, J. R., Martino, B. D., & Tan, G. C. Y, et al. A genetically mediated bias in decision making driven by failure of amygdala control. The Journal of Neuroscience,2009,29(18),5985-5991.
[152]Ronnlund, M. Karlsson, E., & Laggnas, E., et al. Risky decision making across three arenas of choice:Are younger and older adults differently susceptible to framing effects? The Journal of General Psychology,2005,132(1),81-93.
[153]Rothman, A. J., Salovey, P., & Antone, C., et al. The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,1993,29,408-433.
[154]Rozin, P., & Nemeroff, C. Sympathetic magical thinking:The contagion and similarity heuristics. New York:Cambridge University Press,2002,201-216.
[155]Rugg, M. D., & Nagy, M. E. Lexical contribution to non-word repetition effects: Evidence from event-related potentials. Memory and Cognition,1987,15, 473-481.
[156]Russell, J. A. Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review,2003,110,145-172.
[157]Rustichini, A. Neuroeconomics:Present and future. Games and Economic Behavior,2005,52(2),201-212.
[158]Sanfey, A. G., & Chang, L. J. Multiple systems in decision making. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,2008,1128,53-62.
[159]Satpute, A. B. Integrating automatic and controlled processes into neurocognitive models of social cognition. Brain Research,2006,1079,86-97.
[160]Schneider, S. L. Framing and conflict:Aspiration level contingency, the status quo, and current theories of risky choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,1992,18,1040-1057.
[161]Schneider, S. L., & Lopes, L. L. Reflection in preferences under risk:Who and when may suggest why. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,1986,12,535-548.
[162]Schneider, W. Controlled & automatic processing:Behavior, theory, and biological-mechanisms. Cognition Science,2003,27,525-559.
[163]Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. Controlled and automatic human information processing:Detection, search, attention. Psychological Review,1977,84,1-66.
[164]Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. Mood, misattribution and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,1983,45,513-523.
[165]Shafir, E. Uncertainty and the difficulty of thinking through disjunctions. Cognition,1994,50,403-430.
[166]Shafir, E., Simonson, I., & Tversky, A. Reason-based choice. Cognition,1993, 49,11-36.
[167]Simon, A. F., Fagley, N. S., & Halleran, J. G. Decision framing:Moderating effects of individual differences and cognitive processing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,2004,17,77-93.
[168]Sloman, S. A. The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin,1996,119,3-22.
[169]Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. Why study risk perception? Risk Analysis,1982,2(2),83-95.
[170]Smith, E. E., & Jonides, J. Storage and executive process in the frontal lobes. Science,1999,283,1657-1661.
[171]Smolensky, P. On the proper treatment of connectionism. Behavioral and Brain Science,1988,11,1-23.
[172]Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behavior and Brain Science,2000,23, 645-726.
[173]Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2008,94 (4),672-695.
[174]Steul, M. Does the framing of investment portfolios influence risk-taking behavior? Some experimental results. Journal of Economic Psychology,2008, 27(4),557-570.
[175]Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., & Boninger, D. S., et al. The consideration of future consequences:Weighting immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1994,66(4),742-752.
[176]Sunghwan, Y., & Baumgartner, H. Motivational compatibility and the role of anticipated feelings in positively valenced persuasive message framing. Psychology & Marketing,2008,25 (11),1007-1026.
[177]Sutton, S., Braren, M., & Zubin, J., et al. Evoked-potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty, Science,1965,150(3700),1187-1188.
[178]Sweeny, K. Crisis decision theory:Decision in the face of negative events. Psychological Bulletin,2008,134(1),61-76.
[179]Takemura, K. Influence of elaboration on the framing of decision. The Journal of Psychology,1994,128,33-39.
[180]Tetlock, P. E. Study on judgment and choice:People as politcians. Theory & Psychology,1991,1(4),451-475.
[181]Toda, M. Emotion and decision making. Acta Psychologica,1980,45,133-155.
[182]Toll, B. A., Salovey, P., & O'Malley S. S., et al. Message framing for smoking cessation:The interaction of risk perceptions and gender. Nicotine & Tobacco, 2008,10(1),195-200.
[183]Tom, S. M., Fox, C. R., & Trepel, C., et al. The neural basis of loss aversion in decision-making under risk. Science,2007,313,515-518.
[184]Tversky, A., & Kahnemen, D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science,1981,211(4481),453-458.
[185]Van Veen, V., & Carter, C. S. The anterior cingulate as a conflict monitor:fMRI and ERP studies. Physiology & Behavior,2002,77,477-482.
[186]Vreese, C. H. D.,& Kandyla, A. News framing and public support for a common foreign and security policy. Journal of Common Market Studies,2009, 47 (3),453-481.
[187]Wagenaar, W. A., Keren, G., & Lichtenstein, S. Islands and hostages:Deep and surface structures of decision problems. Acta Psychologica,1988,67,175-189.
[188]Wang, X. T. Framing effects:Dynamics and task domains. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1996,68(2),145-157.
[189]Wang, X. T.,& Johnston, V. S. Perceived social context and risk preference:A reexamination of framing effects in a life-death decision problem. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,1995,8,279-293.
[190]Wang, X. T., Simons, F., & Bredart, S. Social cues and verbal framing in risky choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,2001,14,1-15.
[191]Winkielman, P., Knutson, B., & Paulus, M., et al. Affective influence on judgments and decisions:Moving towards core mechanisms. Review of General Psychology,2007,11(2),179-192.
[192]Wright, W. F., & Bower, G. H. Mood effects on subjective probability assessment. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes,1992,52, 276-291.
[193]Yang, J., Li, H., & Zhang, Y., et al. The neural basis of risky decision-making in a blackjack task, Neuroreport,2007,18(14),1507-1510.
[194]Yuan, J. J., Zhang, Q. L., & Chen, A. T., et al. Are we sensitive to valence differences in emotionally negative stimuli? Electrophysiological evidence from an ERP study. Neuropsychologia,2007,45,2764-2771.
[195]Zeelenberg, M., & Pieters, R. Feeling is for doing:A pragmatic approach to the study of emotions in economic behavior. Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum,2006, 117-137.
[196]Zhang, Y. L., & Miao, D. M. Social cues and framing effects in risky decisions among Chinese military students. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,2008, 11(3),241-246.
[197]Zhang, Y. L., Xiao, L. J., & Ma, Y., et al. Effect of framing on risky choice:One case study in China. Social Behavior and Personality,2008,36 (5),651-658.
[198]陈远章.转型期中国突发事件社会风险管理研究.博士学位论文,中南大学,2009.
[199]段锦云,曹忠良,娄玮瑜.框架效应及其认知机制的研究进展.应用心理学,2008,14(4),378-384.
[200]段锦云.基于认知惰性的创业风险决策框架效应双维认知机制研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2008.
[201]范秀成,张运来.情感影响冲动性购买的机制研究.社会科学家,2006(2),148-151.
[202]高利苹,李纾,时勘.从对框架效应的分析看风险决策的神经基础.心理科学进展,2006,14(6),859-865.
[203]何贵兵,梁社红,刘剑.风险偏好预测中的性别差异和框架效应.应用心理学,2002,8(4),19-23.
[204]何媛媛,袁加锦,伍泽莲等.正性情绪刺激效价强度的变化对外倾个体注意的调制作用.心理学报,2008,40(11),1158-1164.
[205]黄玮,余嘉元.高三学生在正、负框架下风险偏好的研究.江苏教育学院学报,2008,24(1),32-35.
[206]李胜明,李昊,赵晓玲.框架效应下优秀运动员风险决策偏好研究.成都体育学院学报,2009,35(3),32-35.
[207]李纾.发展中的行为决策研究.心理科学进展,2006,14(4),490-496.
[208]梁哲,许洁虹,李纾等.突发公共安全事件的风险沟通难题—从心理学角度的观察.自然灾害学报,2008,17(2),25-30.
[209]刘涵慧,周洪雨,车宏生.时间压力、个人相关性对不同类型框架下决策的影响.心理学探新,2008,28(108),27-30.
[210]刘咏梅,胡尊爽.沟通技术和时间因素对虚拟团队过程影响实验研究.管理科学,2009,22(3),47-56.
[211]罗跃嘉,黄宇霞,李新影等.情绪对认知加工的影响：事件相关脑电位系列研究.心理科学进展,2006,14(4),505-510.
[212]马庆国,王小毅.非常规突发事件中影响当事人状态的要素分析与数理描述.管理工程学报,2009,23(3),126-130.
[213]马庆国,王小毅.认知神经科学、神经经济学与神经管理学.管理世界,2006,10,139-149.
[214]舒良超.基于决策神经科学的不确定决策机理研究.博士学位论文,浙江大学,2009.
[215]孙多勇.突发性社会公共危机事件下个体与群体行为决策研究.博士学位论文,国防科学技术大学,2005.
[216]王海忠,陈增祥,尹露.公司信息的纵向与横向溢出效应：公司品牌与产品品牌组合视角.南开管理评论,2009,12(1),84-89.
[217]王云芳.公共危机决策中的非理性因素分析.行政论坛,2006(5),54-56.
[218]王湛.突发公共事件应急管理过程及能力评价研究.博士学位论文,武汉理工大学,2008.
[219]薛澜,钟开斌.突发公共事件分类、分级与分期：应急体制的管理基础.中国行政管理,2005(2),102-107.
[220]岳珍珠,张德玄,王岩.冲突控制的神经机制.心理科学进展,2004,12(5),651-660.
[221]曾守锤,李其维.模糊痕迹理论：对经典认知发展理论的挑战.心理科学,2004,27(2),489-492.
[222]张成福.公共危机管理：全面整合的模式与中国的战略选择.中国行政管理,2003(7),6-11.
[223]张凤华,邱江,邱桂凤等.决策中的框架效应再探.心理科学,2007,30(4),886-890.
[224]张江华,刘治平,朱道立.多源点突发灾害事故应急疏散模型与算法.管理科学学报,2009,12(3),111-118.
[225]张江华.突发公共事件应急管理研究—以危险化学品事故为例.博士学位 论文,复旦大学,2008.
[226]张文慧,王晓田.自我框架、风险认知和风险选择.心理学报,2008,40(6),633-641.
[227]张银玲,苗丹民,孙云峰.框架效应对军校大学生决策判断的影响.中国行为医学科学,2006,15(2),155-156.
[228]周祖木,林丹,魏晶娇等.温州市2004-2007年突发公共卫生事件及其影响因素分析.中国预防医学杂志,2009,10(12),1088-1090.
1项目名称：基于神经管理学的非常规突发事件下“氛围-个体-群体”与“生理-心理-行为”多层耦合规律和组合干预研究,编号为90924304
1引自中华人民共和国国务院于2008年9月19日编制的《汶川地震灾后恢复重建总体规划》第一章第二节
2北京经济信息网(http://www.beinet.net.cn/sydh/szyw/200809/t271097.htm)
3数据来源：国家安全生产监督管理总局政府网站事故查询系统
4中华人民共和国中央人民政府网站(http://www.gov.cn/yjgl/2005-08/09/content_21394.htm)
5参见2009年7月14日中华人民共和国外交部例行记者会外交部新闻发言人秦刚答记者问实录(http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/chn/gxh/tyb/fyrbt/jzhsl/t572909.htm)
1引自2010年中央政府工作报告(温家宝,2010年3月5日)
1转引自：薛澜,钟开斌.突发公共事件分类、分级与分期：应急体制的管理基础.中国行政管理,2005(2),102-107.
2转引自：薛澜,钟开斌.突发公共事件分类、分级与分期：应急体制的管理基础.中国行政管理,2005(2),102-107.
3转引自：薛澜,钟开斌.突发公共事件分类、分级与分期：应急体制的管理基础.中国行政管理,2005(2),102-107.
1香港《大公报》,2010年1月5日报道,原文题目为《中国部委高官年初密集调整》(http://www.takungpao.com:82/gate/gb/www.takungpao.com/news/10/01/05/renshi_xiangguan-1196577.htm)