Decision‐makers are resilient in the face of social exclusion
Tóm tắt
A growing body of evidence suggests that social exclusion impairs people's capacity for active deliberation and logical reasoning. Building on this finding and on the postulate from the dual‐process theory that analytical thinking is essential in order to make good judgements and decisions, we hypothesized that social exclusion will alter judgement and choice behaviour. We tested this hypothesis in three experiments in which social exclusion was manipulated using the Cyberball paradigm, an online ball‐tossing game in which participants either received the ball a fair number of times or were excluded by the other two players. We focused on a range of tasks designed to be sensitive to participants’ ability to engage in analytical thinking and careful deliberation, including the cognitive reflection test (Experiment 1) and a set of anchoring, intertemporal preference, disjunction, and confidence tasks (experiments 2 and 3). Our results unanimously failed to support the hypothesis that social exclusion influences people's judgements and decision‐making. We discuss the implications of our findings for social exclusion theory.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Albaity M., 2014, Cognitive reflection test and behavioral biases in Malaysia, Malaysia, 9, 149
Bargh J., 1994, Handbook of social cognition: Basic processes; applications, 1040
Baumeister R. F., 2005, The social outcast: Ostracism, social exclusion, rejection, and bullying, 53
Campitelli G., 2010, Correlations of cognitive reflection with judgments and choices, Judgment and Decision Making, 5, 182, 10.1017/S1930297500001066
Gal P., 2014, The cognitive reflection test and the propensity to use heuristics in decision making, Comenius Management Review., 8, 29
Ghazal S., 2014, Predicting biases in very highly educated samples: Numeracy and metacognition, Judgment and Decision Making, 9, 15, 10.1017/S1930297500004952
Janda L., 1996, The psychologist's book of self‐tests
Kahneman D., 2005, A model of heuristic judgment, The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning, 267
Morey R. D. Rouder J. N. Jamil T. &Morey M. R. D.(2015).Package ‘BayesFactor’. Retrieved fromhttp://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/BayesFactor/BayesFactor.pdf
Noori M., 2016, Cognitive reflection as a predictor of susceptibility to behavioral anomalies, Judgment and Decision Making, 11, 114, 10.1017/S1930297500007634
Plessner H., 2008, Intuition in judgment and decision making, 251
Walasek L., 2018, Adaptive cooperation in the face of social exclusion
Welsh M. B. Burns N. R. &Delfabbro P. H.(2013).The Cognitive Reflection Test: how much more than Numerical Ability?Paper presented at the CogSci 2013 Proceedings.