Lecture 11 Flashcards
What is the balance for a decision?
Cognitive and affective factors
What is integral affect?
- Affect resides on the matter itself, attributes and characteristics are about the matter = integrally connected to matter of the decision itself
- e.g more likely to say yes to someone we met on a trip to go out next week, whereas more likely to say no to the dentist
- All about focal matter of decision and carrying affect
What is incidental affect?
- Affect that is not connected to the matter itself
- e.g won the lottery and friend asks to decorate his house = more likely to say yes because you are happy, but if you lose a lawsuit, you are more likely to saw no
- Affect is about an extraneous event = unrelated circumstances
What is anticipated affect?
- Will we be satisfied with our decisions or will we feel regret
- Anticipate the affect that has not yet materialised
- Decision we have made
What is post-decisional affect?
- After the decision, are we satisfied or regret
- Decision we will have made as anticipated by ourselves prior to decision
What did Zajonc’s say?
- Affective reactions to stimuli may precede cognitive reactions = preferences need no inferences
- Affective relations are quick, inescapable, and persistent, difficult to verbalise = English language does not provide enough adjectives to describe feedback, not as many as one actually feels = not describing the thing itself, but oneself
- Had ppts give pos/neg performance feedback after believing they were good at the task, ppts were debriefed that everything was fake and measured mood again, mood stuck
- Affect is in service of making decisions on the basis of minimal cognitive engagement
- If you are an organism with one mechanism (matter how effective), you do not have affect, as you are not flexible to make decisions = response mediated with affect needs time = need to able to think about it
What is the mere exposure effect?
- Japanese ideographs were presented 0, 1,3, 9 or 27 times (ppt does not know material)
- Ppts meant to recognise stimuli again, but they do not recognise them, not aware that they have seen them BUT they have preferences
- Substantial correlation to subjective affect to stimulus exposure = like what you see
- Correlation with stimulus exposure and subjective recognition = recognise what you see
- BUT subject affect and recognition are not connected = many things are liked but are not recognised, and things that are recognised but not liked very much
What did Damasio do?
- Thoughts are largely made from images, including perceptual and symbolic representations
- Almost like a mindmap of a memory/image where feelings and sensations are noted
- Images become marked by pos/neg feelings linked directly/indirectly to bodily states
- Images then become alarm signals, or beacons of incentive
- Somatic markers increase accuracy and efficiency of the decision process = absence of markers degrades decision performance
- Affect is in the background = prone to respond in some ways = but we still say how we will respond
What is the risk-as-feelings hypothesis?
- Feelings can arise without cognitive mediation
- Impact of cognitive evaluations on behaviour is mediated partly by affective responses
- Affect can be so dominant, it takes over the decision = affective value determines decisions
- Emotions sometimes produce behavioural responses that depart from the best course of action
- Emotional reactions to a risky situation often diverge from cognitive evaluations of risk severity e.g fear at dentist
- Emotional reactions may then exert dominating influence on behaviour which is not adaptive e.g interpersonal conflict
- Vividness and concreteness make affect more salient, and increase its influence in the decision process
What is the risk-as-feelings study?
- Visceral information is immediately linked to affective responses
- Is risk information disregarded under conditions of hot as compared to cool decision making
- Ppts received descriptions of cookies vs freshly baked cookies when processing risk information about a gamble they can make to win such cookies
- Gamble to draw one card of 10, win = eat as many cookies and complete participation, lose = no cookies, stay in lab and do raven matrices
- OR not paly the gamble = no cookies and a few questionnaires
- Two risk conditions: cards either 8:2 winning: losing cards or 6:4 in the stack
- Participants are sensitive to risk only in the non-visceral condition where cookies are only described = more people choose low risk in non-visceral condition
- Win-chances were seen higher in visceral condition (visceral = cookies are seen as more pleasant to eat in case of winning)
- Mood did not differ between conditions
What are the implications of the risk-as-feelings study?
- Manipulations enhancing the sensory aspects of appetitive stimuli promote impulsive behaviour
- Focus of attention is narrowed on object of desire, on present instead of future
- The more visceral, proximal information is available, the stronger the influence of immediate motivation, and elicited emotional states
- Similar to Kahneman’s two processes: slow/deliberate vs fast/unconscious
What is the relation with integral affect?
- Inverse relation between perceived risk and perceived benefit = high risk, high reward
- Correlation that might exist in the environment BUT in people’s minds there is a negative correlation e.g vaccines - low risk, high benefit, or alcohol - high risk, low benefit BECAUSE of affect
- If affect is positive = perceived as high benefit, low risk and vice versa
- People’s overall impression of an activity in terms of affect impacts on their judgements of its attributes
- Ppts evaluated a number of hazard activities in terms of liking then rated risk and benefit for each activity
- Liked activities show a pattern of low risk/high benefit, and disliked activities were high risk/low benefit
What were the studies by Finucane?
1) Under time pressure, elaborative thinking is limited, judgements have to rely on affect more than under no time pressure
- Ppts rated activities in terms of risk/benefit under no/time pressure
- Stronger negative correlation under time pressure, with no time pressure, less dramatic correlations, with little significance
2) Raising/Lowering liking of alternative should impact on risk and benefit judgements
- Ppts gave some ratings of technologies risks and benefits, read a vignette containing manipulated info about risk/benefit
- Ppts repeated their ratings of risks/benefits
- Cognitively: Second ratings for non-manipulated dimension should not change, affect heuristic view: they should change
- Manipulated features influence unmanipulated ones (negative correlation from non-manipulated to manipulated)
What is affect-as-information?
- Affect as a cue for judgements = mental shortcut
- Students write about a happy/sad life event or give a telephone interview, later judgements about life satisfaction are mood-congruent
- Ready-made cue is more efficient than weighting pros/cons, retrieving information from memory
- Is decision is complex or mental resources are limited
What is the mood manipulation exp?
- Roulette game: ppts receive chips equivalent to ppt credit that can be put at risk or win more for a prize
- Either given candies or not: makes them mildly elated - influences mood for 10-15 minutes
- Ppts indicate the winning probability at which they would agree to take a gamble of a certain risk level
- Mildly elated subjects tended to be more risk averse than neutral subjects when the risk was medium or high but not when the risk was low
- Positive mood makes people risk-averse if stakes are high
- Thought-listing results: focus on loss is greater for happy participants than controls when stakes are high, affect can change perceived utility of gains and losses
What is the relationship of fear and anger on risk perception?
- Selections of emotions that fall on opposite sides of certainty and control appraisal dimensions: fear and anger
- Hypothesis: Anger = certainty appraisal = optimistic risk assessments & Fear = uncertainty appraisal = pessimistic risk assessment
- Used fear survey schedule 2, Spielberger trait-anxiety scale and anger scale
- Risk perception via perception of risk questionnaire with 12 death causes are risk-related
- Fear was positively related to perceived risk, anger was negatively related to perceived risk
What is the study looking at unconscious thought?
- Deliberation-without-attention effect?
- Multi-attribute stimuli with best choice predetermined and ppts make their choice EITHER after a few minutes of distraction, after a few minutes of deliberation, or immediately
- First choice yields best choice
- Criticisms include replicability, control condition lacking, alternative explanations