CAJ | 학술논문

为探索跨期决策的心理机制，本研究利用加工分离程序范式，检验了跨期决策过程的主导策略究竟是分析系统的时间折扣策略还是启发式系统的单维占优策略。3个实验分别操纵了决策目标、认知负荷和策略启动因素，实验结果一致性地发现：能够影响分析系统策略的决策目标和策略启动因素没有导致分析系统策略贡献率的变化，能够影响启发式系统策略的认知负荷和策略启动因素导致了启发式系统策略贡献率的变化。研究结果支持启发式系统的单维占优策略在跨期决策中起作用的假设，但不支持分析系统的时间折扣策略起作用的假设。本研究或能加深人们对跨期决策心理机制的理解，并为建立、健全与跨期决策相关的政策、法律、法规提供理论支持和帮助。
위탐색과기결책적심리궤제，본연구이용가공분리정서범식，검험료과기결책과정적주도책략구경시분석계통적시간절구책략환시계발식계통적단유점우책략。3개실험분별조종료결책목표、인지부하화책략계동인소，실험결과일치성지발현：능구영향분석계통책략적결책목표화책략계동인소몰유도치분석계통책략공헌솔적변화，능구영향계발식계통책략적인지부하화책략계동인소도치료계발식계통책략공헌솔적변화。연구결과지지계발식계통적단유점우책략재과기결책중기작용적가설，단불지지분석계통적시간절구책략기작용적가설。본연구혹능가심인문대과기결책심리궤제적리해，병위건립、건전여과기결책상관적정책、법률、법규제공이론지지화방조。
Intertemporal choice refers to decisions that involve tradeoffs among outcomes at different points of time （Frederick, Loewenstein, ＆ O＇Donoghue, 2002; Prelec ＆ Loewenstein, 1991）. It is not only a unique characteristic of human behavior, but is also a relevant matter to policymaking and national welfare. Two families of models on intertemporal choice exist. One is the family of discounting models, such as discounted utility model or hyperbolic discounting model. These models assume that people discount future outcomes by their immediacy and subsequently compare the discounted values. The other is the family of priority models, such as tradeoff model or equate-to-differentiate model. These models assume that people compare the differences between dimensions and make decisions along a single dimension. Considerable debate has occurred regarding the strategy that people adopt when making intertemporal choices. The extant evidence based on outcome tests has been inconclusive. To address this debate, we used a process-test paradigm called process dissociation procedure （PDP） to explore whether the strategy that underlies intertemporal choice is a discounting strategy or a priority strategy. Based on dual-system theory, discounting strategy is presumably driven by an analytic system, whereas priority strategy is presumably driven by a heuristic system. Following the logic of PDP, we proposed the following hypothesis： if decisions are based on discounting （priority） strategy, manipulating the factors that affect this strategy results in the transformation of the contribution of the analytic （heuristic） system, whereas the contribution of the heuristic （analytic） remains unchanged. A total of 423 college students participated in the experiments. Specifically, 154 college students participated in Experiment 1, 102 in Experiment 2, and 167 in Experiment 3. In Experiment 1, to ensure that only the analytic system is affected, we manipulated the decision goal by instructing participants to make decisions in a rational manner. In Experiment 2, we examined the effect of cognitive load on the heuristic system by instructing participants to remember several numbers. In Experiment 3, we manipulated strategy priming to simultaneously affect the analytic and heuristic systems by asking participants to answer priming questions before the experiment. The results of Experiment 1 indicated that the decision goal, which was supposed to affect the analytic system, failed to modify the contribution of the analytic system. The results of Experiment 2 showed that cognitive load, which was supposed to affect the heuristic system, modified the contribution of the heuristic system. The results of Experiment 3 suggested that strategy priming, which was supposed to affect both systems, modified the contribution of the heuristic system but did not affect the analytic system. Overall, the results of the three experiments consistently showed that people may adopt a priority strategy, rather than a discounting strategy, when making intertemporal choices. Our findings provide further evidence for the proposition that the priority strategy of heuristic systems dominates the intertemporal choice-making process This research deepens our understanding of the mechanisms that underlie intertemporal choice and provides a theoretical foundation for establishing and stipulating intertemporal policies, laws, and regulations.