CAJ | 학술논문

研究考查了大学生对一般生活事件和意外事故的乐观与悲观偏差，并检验不同测量方法是否会产生不同结果。通过对273名大学生进行问卷研究，结果发现：（1）在直接和间接测量时，被试对一般消极事件、意外事故存在乐观偏差，对幸免于意外事故存在悲观偏差；但对一般积极事件，被试在直接测量时出现乐观偏差，在间接测量时为悲观偏差。（2）在两种方法中，被试对意外事故的乐观偏差皆高于一般消极事件，但一般积极事件与幸免于意外事故的结果在直接测量时有显著差异，而在间接测量中差异不显著。（3）在直接测量时，消极事件的发生频率越低乐观偏差越严重，积极事件的发生频率越低则悲观偏差越严重；在间接测量中事件频率与偏差结果相关不显著。
연구고사료대학생대일반생활사건화의외사고적악관여비관편차，병검험불동측량방법시부회산생불동결과。통과대273명대학생진행문권연구，결과발현：（1）재직접화간접측량시，피시대일반소겁사건、의외사고존재악관편차，대행면우의외사고존재비관편차；단대일반적겁사건，피시재직접측량시출현악관편차，재간접측량시위비관편차。（2）재량충방법중，피시대의외사고적악관편차개고우일반소겁사건，단일반적겁사건여행면우의외사고적결과재직접측량시유현저차이，이재간접측량중차이불현저。（3）재직접측량시，소겁사건적발생빈솔월저악관편차월엄중，적겁사건적발생빈솔월저칙비관편차월엄중；재간접측량중사건빈솔여편차결과상관불현저。
Optimistic bias means that people tend to consider that they are more likely to experience positive events and less likely to experience negative events. Pessimistic bias, bycontrast, means that people think that they are less likely to experience positive events but more likely to experience negative events. There are two methods to measure optimistic and pessimistic bias ： direct measure （ partic- ipants make direct comparisons） and indirect measure （participants make indirect comparisons）. The current study explored optimistic and pessimistic bias about general life events and accidents in university students, and tested whether the measurement method would influence the results. A total of 273 university students were invited to complete a self - de- signed questionnaire that included 7 negative life events, 7 positive life events, 6 accidents and 6 chances of keeping safe in accidents. 132 of the subjects made direct comparisons, the other 141 ones made indirect comparisons. The results showed that ：（ 1 ） In both direct comparisons and indirect comparisons, participants expected that negative life events and accidents were more likely to occur to others than to themselves （ optimistic bias） and keeping safe in accidents were more likely to occur to others than to themselves （pessimistic bias）. However, they showed optimistic bias about positive life events in direct compari- sons but pessimistic bias in indirect comparisons. （2） In both two methods, participants displayed optimistic bias about accidents much stronger than about negative life events. However, there was a significant difference between the bias about positive life events and keeping safe in accidents when the direct measurement was used, but no difference when the indirect measurement was used. （3） In di- rect comparisons, participants had stronger optimistic bias about infrequent/negative events but pessimistic bias about infrequent/posi- tive events. However, these relationships were not significant in indirect comparisons. Although the indirect comparison was proved to be more accurate in measuring optimistic and pessimistic bias, the direct compari- son had been shown to predict behaviors and affective outcomes more effectively. These results suggested that the choice of measurement method should be based on the research purposes.