期刊文献+

语境交流导向与建议方式对建议采纳的影响

The Influence of Contextual Communication Orientation and Advice Type on Advice Taking
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 研究以JAS(决策者–建议者系统)为范式,通过2个实验探讨了语境交流导向(高/低)与建议方式(直白/隐晦)对个体建议采纳的影响以及其中的作用机制。实验1通过问卷测量个体的特质性语境交流导向;实验2则通过操纵材料启动个体的状态性语境交流导向。结果发现,高特质或状态语境交流导向的个体倾向于采纳隐晦型建议,而低特质或状态语境交流导向的个体则倾向于采纳直白型建议,并且个体对建议内容的加工流畅性在这一过程中起到了中介作用。 The present study adopted the JAS paradigm to investigate the effect of the fit between contextual communication orientation and advice type on advice taking,as well as the mediation mechanism.Experiment 1 measured participants’contextual communication orientation with questionnaires,and Experiment 2 used an experimental method to prime participants’contextual communication orientation.The results of both experiments showed that individuals with high contextual communication orientation preferred implicit advice while those with low contextual communication orientation preferred explicit advice.Furthermore,the fit between contextual communication orientation and advice type had a positive effect on advice taking via processing fluency.At last,we discussed the implications of these findings for theory and practice.
作者 段锦云 徐悦 任小云 吴俏敏 DUAN Jinyun;XU Yue;REN Xiaoyun;WU Qiaomin(School of Psychology and Cognitive Science,East China Normal University,Shanghai 200062;International Business School,Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University,Suzhou 215123;School of Education,Soochow University,Suzhou 215123)
出处 《心理与行为研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2020年第2期261-267,共7页 Studies of Psychology and Behavior
基金 国家自然科学基金面上项目(71974140)。
关键词 建议采纳 语境交流导向 建议方式 加工流畅性 advice taking contextual communication orientation advice type processing fluency.
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献120

  • 1翟学伟.人情、面子与权力的再生产——情理社会中的社会交换方式[J].社会学研究,2004(5):48-57. 被引量:580
  • 2Bonaccio, S., & Dalai, R. S. (2006). Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 127-151.
  • 3Brehmer, B., & Hagafors, R. (1986). The use of experts in complex decision-making: a paradigm for the study of staff work. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38, 181-195.
  • 4Budescu, D. V., & Rantilla, A. K. (2000). Confidence in aggregation of expert opinions. Acta Psychologica, 104, 371-398.
  • 5Budescu, D. V., RantiUa, A. K., Yu, H., & Karelitz, T. K. (2003). The effects of asymmetry among advisors on the aggregation of their opinions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90, 178-194.
  • 6Druckman, J. N. (2001). Using credible advice to overcome framing effects. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization,17, 62-82.
  • 7Faro, D., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2006). Affect, empathy, and regressive mispredictions of others' preferences under risk. Management Science, 52, 529-541.
  • 8Fischer, I., & Harvey, N. (1999). Combining forecasts: what information do judges need to outperform the simple average? International dournal of Forecasting, 15, 227-246.
  • 9Gardner, P. H., & Berry, D. C. (1995). The effect of different forms of advice on the control of a simulated complex system. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 55-79.
  • 10Gino, F. (2008). Do we listen to advice just because we paid for it? The impact of advice cost on its use. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 107, 234-245.

共引文献99

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部