风险偏好为什么是不稳定的？——后悔调节风险偏好的理论探索

Emotion is one of the most popular spots in recent decision making research, while regret is always being considered as the most relevant emotion with decision making. Current article firstly reviewed the literature of regret theory to date to profile the relation between regret and decision making under uncertainty through three mainlines: experienced regret, anticipated regret and regret orientation, respectively. And then, based on the theory of regret regulation raised by Zeelenberg recently, we came up with a theory of risk preference regulated by regret. Then three studies were conducted under the current framework, by using experiment, survey, and quasi experiment design. The major findings were below: In study 1, when playing ultimatum game, risk preference in decision making can be determined by experienced regret and anticipated regret of risk aversion, which made individual risk taking; In study 2, survey showed that risk orientation was negatively related with risk taking (health/safety, recreational and social); In study 3, when asked the Asian Disease Problem, risk preference can be determined by the coherence of the risk preference between the past decision and the current alternative. Individuals much more like alternative with the same risk preference of the past decision. A two way interaction was found, regret orientation, as a personality, was found as a moderator. Individuals with high regret orientation were more sensitive to the coherence of the risk preference than those with low regret orientation. Three studies provide fruitful evidences for the theory of risk preference regulated by regret in different prospective, show us the function of regret in decision making.

海洛因成瘾者决策障碍及其行为机制的研究----短视行为及冲动、强迫和药物在决策中的作用

Addiction can be investigated from the perspective of decision making. Addicts usually make incorrect decisions when facing drug-related cues or they are driven to drugs, resulting in repeated drug seeking and taking. The present study adopted temporal discounting as behavioral task and on the basis of the fact that heroin addicts discounted more steeply than health participants (addicts preferred to choose immediate but smaller reward, regarded as myopia) which was consistent with previous research, three questions was raised and being concentrated on in this study. The first question was whether the character of myopia would be revealed in a somewhat complicated task? We designed a card game in which the participants were tested whether they would play the trump card in order to win a trick but not the whole game. Addicts played the trump card significantly earlier than controls did, indicating they focused on immediate single trick but not the game. Moreover, the performance in the card game and temporal discounting correlated significantly, suggesting addicts would display myopic decision not only in simply task like temporal discounting but also in task more complicated and similar to daily-life decision. Secondly, the present study adopted various kinds of temporal discounting tasks. In previous research, temporal discounting gain task was usually adopted. In the present study, we also adopted temporal discounting loss task. In either gain or loss task, there are two delayed amounts. Results showed in each decision condition addicts made poorer performance compared with control but in larger amount condition, addicts actually improved their decision performance. Meanwhile, addicts did not show loss aversion due to their close discount rates in gain and loss task while for controls, the discount rates were much lower in loss task than those in gain task. Thus we demonstrated that addicts were insensitive to negative outcomes by the method of temporal discounting. Finally, we investigated three mechanisms which exerted impacts on decision making. We adopted Go/NoGo task to test impulsivity and found addicts commits more errors (higher impulsivity) than controls did. We also designed a behavioral task which could be used to test drug-related compulsive behavior on human participants. Results showed addicts produced stereotyped key-pressing behavior when presented with drug-related cues. Furthermore, it was found participants with higher impulsivity displayed poorer performance in decision making but addicts with higher compulsivity only made poorer performance in smaller amount decision and the correlation between compulsivity and decision making was relative weak. In order to investigate the role of susceptibility and effect of drugs, we adopted years of abusing heroin as the indictor and discovered addicts with longer history of heroin abusing made poorer performance in smaller amount condition than addicts with shorter history. Also, the earlier the addicts began to use drug, the worse they would do in the smaller amount decision. The results here indicated drug itself could exert impact on decision making in certain condition. The present study revealed three characters of heroin addicts from the aspect of decision making: (1) focusing upon current benefit due to they preferred to choose immediate gain and delayed loss; (2) showed no loss aversion compared with healthy participants (3) inability to inhibit inappropriate response particularly when facing drug-related cue. These characters contribute to the facts that addicts seek and take drugs repeatedly while ignoring the negative consequences caused by abusing drugs.