当前位置: X-MOL 学术Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
How heuristic credibility cues affect credibility judgments and decisions.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied ( IF 2.813 ) Pub Date : 2020-07-13 , DOI: 10.1037/xap0000279
Leo Gugerty 1 , Drew M Link 1
Affiliation  

We investigated how heuristic credibility cues affected credibility judgments and decisions. Participants saw advice in comments in a simulated online health forum. Each comment was accompanied by credibility cues, including author expertise and peer reputation ratings (by forum members) of comments and authors. In Experiment 1, participants' credibility judgments of comments and authors increased with expertise and increased with the number of reputation ratings for supportive ratings and decreased with number of ratings for disconfirmatory ratings. Also, results suggested that the diagnosticity (informativeness) of credibility cues influenced credibility judgments. Using the same credibility cues and task context, Experiment 2 found that when high-utility choices had low credibility, participants often chose alternatives with lower utility but higher credibility. They did this more often when less utility had to be sacrificed and when more credibility was gained. The influence of credibility and utility information on participants' choices was mediated by their explicit credibility judgments. These findings supported the predictions of a Bayesian belief-updating model and an elaboration of Prospect Theory (Budescu, Kuhn, Kramer, & Johnson, 2002). This research provides novel insights into how cues including valence and relevance influence credibility judgments and how utility and credibility trade off during decision making. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译:

启发式可信度线索如何影响可信度判断和决策。

我们调查了启发式可信度线索如何影响可信度判断和决策。参与者在模拟的在线健康论坛中看到了评论中的建议。每条评论都附有可信度提示,包括评论和作者的作者专业知识和同行声誉评级(由论坛成员)。在实验1中,参与者对评论和作者的可信度判断随着专业知识的增加而增加,随着支持评级的声誉评级数量增加而增加,随着不肯定评级的评级数量下降。此外,结果表明可信度线索的诊断性(信息性)影响可信度判断。使用相同的可信度线索和任务上下文,实验 2 发现当高效用选择的可信度低时,参与者通常选择效用较低但可信度较高的替代方案。当必须牺牲较少的效用并且获得更多可信度时,他们会更频繁地这样做。可信度和效用信息对参与者选择的影响是通过他们明确的可信度判断来调节的。这些发现支持了贝叶斯信念更新模型的预测和前景理论的阐述(Budescu、Kuhn、Kramer 和 Johnson,2002 年)。这项研究提供了关于包括效价和相关性在内的线索如何影响可信度判断以及在决策过程中效用和可信度如何权衡的新见解。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。可信度和效用信息对参与者选择的影响是通过他们明确的可信度判断来调节的。这些发现支持了贝叶斯信念更新模型的预测和前景理论的阐述(Budescu、Kuhn、Kramer 和 Johnson,2002 年)。这项研究提供了关于包括效价和相关性在内的线索如何影响可信度判断以及在决策过程中效用和可信度如何权衡的新见解。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。可信度和效用信息对参与者选择的影响是通过他们明确的可信度判断来调节的。这些发现支持了贝叶斯信念更新模型的预测和前景理论的阐述(Budescu、Kuhn、Kramer 和 Johnson,2002 年)。这项研究提供了关于包括效价和相关性在内的线索如何影响可信度判断以及在决策过程中效用和可信度如何权衡的新见解。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。这项研究提供了关于包括效价和相关性在内的线索如何影响可信度判断以及在决策过程中效用和可信度如何权衡的新见解。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。这项研究提供了关于包括效价和相关性在内的线索如何影响可信度判断以及在决策过程中效用和可信度如何权衡的新见解。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA,保留所有权利)。
更新日期:2020-07-13
down
wechat
bug