| 英文摘要 |
How do people allocate choices between two alternatives when the benefit of each alternative varied as a function of the allocation of recent choices? On any one trial option A, had a higher immediate benefit than a option B, but across all trials, option B had a higher overall benefit than option A. Rational choice theory require that people choice option with the greatest overall benefit, irrespective of which has higher immediate benefit. In contrast, prior research indicate that people were motivated to choose the option with higher immediate benefit, irrespective of the consequences for future returns, and it is termed “melioration”. The phenomenon of melioration is interesting and curious in behavioral decision. If we take maximization as normative rule, then why our behavior may deviate from maximization shift toward melioration. The reason behind the melioration in the irrational decision-making is a curious one. Herrnstein et al (1993) states that there are two main factors that causes melioration, and they are, cognitive and motivational factor. The former factor lies in the limitation of people’s cognitive capacity, thus making people impossible which might deal with the events to happen in future, but according to Kudadjie-Gyamfi & Rachlin (1996), the cognitive factor is not the source of irrational decision-making, for people may reach the status of limited reasoning under limited conditions. The real irrational decision-making is caused by the motivational factor that is the origin of humans’ emotional or behavioral preference such as the preference of risk-taking. But this inclination is not permanent, Perspective Theory (Kahneman & Tversky (1984) has proved that under the condition of gain, people are actually risk-averse; but under the condition of loss, people prefer to take risks. People’s preference for the risk will vary with different frames. Therefore, this research also holds a high interest in whether there are rigidities in melioration (i.e. whether it is difficult to change the behavior of melioration), whether under different conditions of profit vs. risk, melioration behavior will improve to some extent. Besides, risk taking nature in one may also cause the melioration behavior to change. Since people with high-risk personality are more willing to take risks, are they more inclined to choose higher long-term profit? This is another topic for discussion in this research. The above are the focus of attention of this research, and two laboratory trials will be conducted to prove it. The experiment 1 employs a 3 a simple one-factor, two-level, between-subjects design on 90 EMBA students who were enrolled in a marketing management course in Taiwan. Half of the subjects were induced to positive framing (gain condition), and the other subjects were induced to negative framing (loss condition). The results of Experiment 1 indicated that melioration was declined when decision performance was framed on a loss condition. The experiment 2 used a 2 (framing: gain versus loss) × 2 (time delay: long versus short) between-subject design on 118 EMBA students. This research added to test persons with risk taking tendency by measuring seven scales that are allocated different scores totaling 36. The higher the total score is, the more willing subjects are to take risks (Lan, Shao-Wen, 1999). Again, the results of Experiment 2 indicated that the melioration was declined when decision performance was framed on a loss condition. The framing effect on the melioration was found regardless whether time delay is short or long. Additionally, the results of Experiment 2 found the melioration was declined when people have a tendency for high risk-taking preference. |
本站僅提供期刊文獻檢索。
