Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-28 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Preference reversal of joint evaluation is well known in the field of decision-making. The Generalized Evaluability Theory (GET), as a theory for preference reversal with the strongest explanatory power, emphasizes the role of the mode of evaluation (i.e., the presence or absence of contextual information) in the decision-making process. The theoretical models for the contextual effect of social comparison and social evaluation, e.g., the Inclusion/Exclusion Model (IEM), also emphasizes the role of contextual information (especially the similarity between context and target) in the evaluation process. Analogous to preference reversal, the contextual effect can also be explained as a kind of "decision preference" (upward assimilation and downward contrast) and its "reversal" (upward contrast and downward assimilation). Taken as analogous concepts, preference reversal and contextual effect are first introduced and compared, and then contextual effect is explained and extended from the new perspective of joint evaluation. Future research should pay attention to the following aspects to deepen the understanding of the contextual effect and promote the theoretical integration and practical implications of these two fields.牋First, how to measure contextual effects. Previous studies usually measured the contextual effects as the relative difference of the target evaluations among different contexts, which might lead to a contrary conclusion. Similar to the fact that preference reversal is concluded from the difference between joint and separate evaluations, future research on contextual effect should also take the baseline condition (i. e., the target is evaluated separately) into account. This is to avoid the inapposite measure of contextual effects of social comparison and social evaluation. 牋Second, what factors influence contextual effects. Inspired from the contextual factors of preference reversal effects of joint evaluations, future research may pay more attention to the target-context similarity for various evaluation dimensions of social comparison and social evaluation. 牋Third, the contextual effect may be extended to cross-dimensional domains. It is common for cross-dimensional trade-offs in decision-making during joint evaluations. Thus, the cross-dimensional contextual effects should not be rare in social comparison and social evaluation. Specifically, the cross-dimensional domains may be manifested as followings: 1) context and target are cross-dimensional, 2) target evaluation on one dimension (e.g., trustworthiness) is impacted by the ingroup/outgroup relationships between the evaluator and target resulted from another feature (e.g., race), and 3) contextual effects are modulated by the relevance between the contextual dimension and the target dimension, and so on. 牋Finally, the contextual effect can be linked into practical applications. Decision-making is common in practical context, and the new perspective of joint evaluation can provide insights for the decision-making dilemma related to contextual effects, in particular when the target and the context are extremely similar leading to a hard prediction of the occurrence of the assimilation effect. Besides, based on the perspective of joint evaluation, multidimensional criteria in real situations such as interviews should be evaluated separately to minimize the adverse impact of contextual assimilation and contrast, when it is more difficult to evaluate the key criterion than the less important criterion. Therefore, the perspective of joint evaluation can inspire the application of contextual effect in a wider range of evaluation and decision-making situations in the future.
submitted time 2023-03-25 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Preference reversal of joint evaluation is well known in the field of decision-making. The Generalized Evaluability Theory (GET), as a theory for preference reversal with the strongest explanatory power, emphasizes the role of the mode of evaluation (i.e., the presence or absence of contextual information) in the decision-making process. The theoretical models for the contextual effect of social comparison and social evaluation, e.g., the Inclusion/Exclusion Model (IEM), also emphasizes the role of contextual information (especially the similarity between context and target) in the evaluation process. Analogous to preference reversal, the contextual effect can also be explained as a kind of "decision preference" (upward assimilation and downward contrast) and its "reversal" (upward contrast and downward assimilation). Taken as analogous concepts, preference reversal and contextual effect are first introduced and compared, and then contextual effect is explained and extended from the new perspective of joint evaluation. Future research should pay attention to the following aspects to deepen the understanding of the contextual effect and promote the theoretical integration and practical implications of these two fields.牋First, how to measure contextual effects. Previous studies usually measured the contextual effects as the relative difference of the target evaluations among different contexts, which might lead to a contrary conclusion. Similar to the fact that preference reversal is concluded from the difference between joint and separate evaluations, future research on contextual effect should also take the baseline condition (i. e., the target is evaluated separately) into account. This is to avoid the inapposite measure of contextual effects of social comparison and social evaluation. 牋Second, what factors influence contextual effects. Inspired from the contextual factors of preference reversal effects of joint evaluations, future research may pay more attention to the target-context similarity for various evaluation dimensions of social comparison and social evaluation. 牋Third, the contextual effect may be extended to cross-dimensional domains. It is common for cross-dimensional trade-offs in decision-making during joint evaluations. Thus, the cross-dimensional contextual effects should not be rare in social comparison and social evaluation. Specifically, the cross-dimensional domains may be manifested as followings: 1) context and target are cross-dimensional, 2) target evaluation on one dimension (e.g., trustworthiness) is impacted by the ingroup/outgroup relationships between the evaluator and target resulted from another feature (e.g., race), and 3) contextual effects are modulated by the relevance between the contextual dimension and the target dimension, and so on. 牋Finally, the contextual effect can be linked into practical applications. Decision-making is common in practical context, and the new perspective of joint evaluation can provide insights for the decision-making dilemma related to contextual effects, in particular when the target and the context are extremely similar leading to a hard prediction of the occurrence of the assimilation effect. Besides, based on the perspective of joint evaluation, multidimensional criteria in real situations such as interviews should be evaluated separately to minimize the adverse impact of contextual assimilation and contrast, when it is more difficult to evaluate the key criterion than the less important criterion. Therefore, the perspective of joint evaluation can inspire the application of contextual effect in a wider range of evaluation and decision-making situations in the future.
Subjects: Psychology >> Cognitive Psychology submitted time 2022-11-24
Abstract：
[Objective] Explain and extend contextual effect from the new perspective of joint evaluation.
[Methods] Preference reversal of joint evaluation is well known in the field of decision-making. The Generalized Evaluability Theory (GET), as a theory for preference reversal with the strongest explanatory power, emphasizes the role of the mode of evaluation (i.e., the presence or absence of contextual information) in the decision-making process. The theoretical models for the contextual effect of social comparison and social evaluation, e.g., the Inclusion/Exclusion Model (IEM), also emphasizes the role of contextual information (especially the similarity between context and target) in the evaluation process. Analogous to preference reversal, the contextual effect can also be explained as a kind of "decision preference" (upward assimilation and downward contrast) and its "reversal" (upward contrast and downward assimilation). Analogous to preference reversal, the contextual effect can also be explained as a kind of "decision preference" (upward assimilation and downward contrast) and its "reversal" (upward contrast and downward assimilation).
[Results] Based on the analogy between contextual effect and preference reversal, the contextual effect was explained and extended from the new perspective of joint evaluation.
[Limitations] Based on the differences between contextual effect and preference reversal,their influencing facors may be different
[Conclusions] Future research should concern how to measure the contextual effect, and several prospective directions were proposed, e.g. interaction of contextual factors and evaluated taget, cross-dimensional contextual effects, interaction of contextual factors and evaluator, and practical applications of contextual effects. It is expected to promote a deeper understanding of the contextual effect and the theoretical integration and practical implications of these two fields.
Peer Review Status:
Awaiting Review
Subjects: Psychology >> Applied Psychology submitted time 2019-01-21
Abstract： " The Microblog behavioral data of typical disaster-stricken areas under the Impact of Typhoon Mangosteen (Guangdong) and non-disaster areas (Anhui) were selected to test the psychological typhoon eye effect from two dimensions of time and space with the method of big data analysis. The results show that there are differences of attention degree in the time dimension, but there is no "high-low-high" psychological typhoon eye pattern in the affected areas. Specifically, the attention of the affected areas after the transit of typhoon is higher than that before the transit of typhoon, while there is no significant difference of the attention of typhoon between the time periods before, during and after the transit. There is no significant difference between the disaster-stricken areas and the non-disaster areas in the dimension of spatial. Limitations of the study are mainly analyzed in order to provide relevant thinking and reference for future research.
Peer Review Status:Awaiting Review
Subjects: Psychology >> Applied Psychology Subjects: Safety Science and Technology >> Safety Social Science submitted time 2019-01-21
Abstract： "The Microblog behavioral data of typical disaster-stricken areas under the Impact of Typhoon Mangosteen (Guangdong) and non-disaster areas (Anhui) were selected to test the psychological typhoon eye effect from two dimensions of time and space with the method of big data analysis. The results show that there are differences of attention degree in the time dimension, but there is no "high-low-high" psychological typhoon eye pattern in the affected areas. Specifically, the attention of the affected areas after the transit of typhoon is higher than that before the transit of typhoon, while there is no significant difference of the attention of typhoon between the time periods before, during and after the transit. There is no significant difference between the disaster-stricken areas and the non-disaster areas in the dimension of spatial. Limitations of the study are mainly analyzed in order to provide relevant thinking and reference for future research.
Peer Review Status:Awaiting Review
Hits
Hits
Downloads
Comment