认知老化对于老年人决策过程的影响:动机的调节作用

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2016.01.15

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 有关老化和决策制定的研究并没有发现一致的年龄差异。从决策过程的角度,论述了老化对于决策制定的多层面影响。从认知层面来讲,流体认知能力的衰减会使老年人在决策制定前搜索更少的信息,使用非补偿性策略,基于属性进行信息搜索和比较;晶体认知能力的相对保持则在一定情况下弥补了这种消极影响;从动机层面来讲,关注情绪管理目标的老年人会倾向于寻求更多积极的信息,为了避免权衡诱发的消极情绪而更多地使用非补偿性策略。动机对于认知老化的消极影响有调节作用。具体来说,社会情绪选择理论和选择性投入假设认为,当决策任务符合老年人的社会目标,即情绪管理目标时,能够激活老年人投入认知资源的动机,从而缓解认知资源的衰减对于老年人决策表现的消极影响。未来的研究需要通过实验设计进一步探索动机与认知的交互作用,将多种过程追踪技术结合起来,明晰动机和认知能力在老年人决策制定中的作用。另外考虑到在社会目标方面的年龄差异,对于老年人决策质量的衡量应该更加注重主观决策质量。

关键词: 动机, 社会目标, 认知老化, 决策过程

Abstract: Research on aging and decision making has yielded inconsistent results. We provide a review of research on the multifaceted impact of aging on decision making from the decision processes perspective. When considering the cognitive decline, older adults examine fewer pieces of information, use noncompensatory strategies and more likely to engage in an attribute-based search before making a decision. When considering the the change of motivation, older adults focus on the adjustment of emotion, and then tend to search more positive information and use noncompensatory strategies to avoid negative emotion induced by explicit trade-offs between features. The motivation can mediate the negative influence of cognitive aging on older adults' decision making. Specifically, the Socioemotional Selectivity Theory and Selective Engagement Hypothesis assume that decision task accord with social goal of older adults will increase the motivation to devote the cognitive resources, and then the older adults' decision performance will not be hampered by the limited cognitive resources. The future studies may conduct the precise experimental studies to further clarify whether or not the interaction between cognition and motivation may influence the older adults' decision-making performance and how. The comprehensive use of process tracing technologies will help avoid the defect of single technology. Considering the age difference of social goals, we should focus on the subjective quality when assessing the quality of older adults' decisions.

Key words: motivation, social goals, cognitive aging, decision process

中图分类号:

B844

濮冰燕, 彭华茂. 认知老化对于老年人决策过程的影响:动机的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(1): 114-120.

PU Bingyan, PENG Huamao. Older Adults' Decision Process in the Context of Cognitive Aging:Motivation as a Moderator[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2016, 32(1): 114-120.

参考文献

Baltes, P.B., Staudinger, U.M., & Lindenberger, U. (1999). Lifespan psychology:Theory and application to intellectual functioning. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 471-507.

Bruine de Bruin, W., Parker, A. M., & Fischhoff, B. (2007). Individual differences in adult decision-making competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 938-956.

Carstensen, L. L. (2006). The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science, 312, 1913-1915.

Carstensen, L. L., & Mikels, J. A. (2005). The positivity effect:Aging and the intersection between cognition and emotion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 117-121.

Finucane, M. L., Mertz, C. K., Slovic, P., & Schmidt, E. S. (2005). Task complexity and older adults' decision-making competence. Psychology and Aging, 20, 71-84.

Fung, H. H., & Carstensen, L. L. (2003). Sending Memorable Messages to the Old:Age Differences in Preferences and Memory for Advertisements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(1), 163-178.

Fung, H. H., & Carstensen, L. L. (2006). Goals change when life's fragility is primed:Lessons learned from older adults, the September 11 attacks and SARS. Social Cognition, 24(3), 248-278.

Hanoch, Y., Wood, S., Barnes, A., Liu, P. J., & Rice, T. (2011). Choosing the right medicare prescription drug plan:the effect of age, strategy selection, and choice set size. Health psychology:official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association, 30(6), 719-727.

Hess, T. M. (2006). Adaptive aspects of social cognitive functioning in adulthood:Age-related goal and knowledge influences. Social Cognition, 24, 279-309.

Hess, T. M., Leclerc, C. M., Swaim, E., & Weatherbee, S. R. (2009). Aging and everyday judgments:the impact of motivational and processing resource factors. Psychology and aging, 24(3), 735-740.

Hess, T. M., Queen, T. L., & Ennis, G. E. (2012). Age and Self-Relevance Effects on Information Search during Decision Making. The Journals of Gerontology Series B:Psychological Sciences and Social Scienc, 68(5), 703-711.

Hess, T. M. (2014). Selective Engagement of Cognitive Resources Motivational Influences on Older Adults' Cognitive Functioning. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(4), 388-407.

Iyengar, S. S., Wells, R. E., & Schwartz, B. (2006). Doing better but feeling worse:Looking for the "best" job undermines satisfaction. Psychological Science, 17, 143-150.

Johnson, M. M. S. (1990). Age differences in decision making:A process methodology for examining strategic information processing. Journal of Gerontology Psychological Sciences, 45, 75-78.

Johnson, M.M.S., & Drungle, S.C. (2000). Purchasing over-the-counter medications:The impact of age differences in information processing. Experimental Aging Research, 26, 245-261.

Johnson, E. J., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Willemsen, M.C. (2008). Process models deserve process data:Comment on Brandstätter, Gigerenzer, and Hertwig (2006). Psychological Review, 115(1), 263-273.

Lambert-Pandraud, R., Laurent, G., & Lapersonne, E. (2005). Repeat purchasing of new automobiles by older consumers:empirical evidence and interpretations. Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 97-113.

Löckenhoff, C. E., & Carstensen, L. L. (2007). Aging, emotion, and health-related decision strategies:Motivational manipulations can reduce age differences. Psychology and Aging, 22, 134-146.

Löckenhoff, C. E., & Carstensen, L. L. (2008). Decision strategies in health care choices for self and others:Older adults but not younger adults make adjustments for the age of the decision target. Journals of Gerontology, Series B:Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 63, P106-P109.

Luce, M. F., Payne, J. W., & Bettman, J. R. (1999). Emotional trade-off difficulty and choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 36, 143-159.

Luce, M. F., Payne, J. W., & Bettman, J. R. (2000). Coping with unfavorable attitude values in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 81, 274-299.

Mata, R., Schooler, L., & Rieskamp, J. (2007). The aging decision maker:Cognitive aging and the adaptive selection of decision strategies. Psychology and Aging, 22, 796-810.

Mata, R., B. von Helversen., & Rieskamp, J. (2010). Learning to choose:cognitive aging and strategy selection learning in decision making. Psychology and Aging, 25, 299-309.

Mata, R., & Nunes, L. (2010). When less is enough:Cognitive aging, information search, and decision quality in consumer choice. Psychology and Aging, 25, 289-298.

Mather, M., Knight, M., & McCaffrey, M. (2005). The allure of the alignable:False memories of choice features. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 134(1), 38-51.

Mather, M. (2006). A review of decision-making processes:Weighing the risks and benefits of aging. In L. L. Carstensen & C. R. Hartel (Eds.), When I'm 64 (pp. 145-173). Washington, DC:National Academies Press.

Meyer, B.J.F., Russo, C., & Talbot, A. (1995). Discourse comprehension and problem solving:Decisions about the treatment of breast cancer by women across the life span. Psychology and Aging, 10, 84-103.

Meyer, B. J., Talbot, A. P., & Ranalli, C. (2007). Why older adults make more immediate treatment decisions about cancer than younger adults. Psychology and aging, 22(3), 505-524

Meyer, B.J., & Pollard, C.A. (2004, April). Why do older adults make faster decisions about treatments for breast cancer? Paper presented at the Cognitive Aging Conference, Atlanta, GA.

Mikels, J. A., & Reed, A. E. (2009).Monetary losses do not loom large in later life:age differences in the framing effect. The Journals of Gerontology Series B:Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 64(4), 457-460.

Mikels, J. A., Löckenhoff, C. E., Maglio, S. J., Carstensen, L. L., Goldstein,M. K., & Garber, A. (2010). Following your heart or your head:Focusing on emotions versus information differentially influences the decisions of younger and older adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Applied, 16, 87-95.

Norman, E., & Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2010). Take a quick click at that! Mouselab and eye-tracking as tools to measure intuition. Foundations for tracing intuition:Challenges and methods, 24-44.

Novak, D. L., & Mather, M. (2007). Aging and variety seeking. Psychology and Aging, 22, 728-737.

Payne, J. W., & Bettman, J. R. (2004). Walking with the scarecrow:The information processing approach to decision research. Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making, 110-132.

Reed, A. E., Mikels, J. A., & Löckenhoff, C. E. (2013). Preferences for choice across adulthood:Age trajectories and potential mechanisms. Psychology and aging, 28(3), 625-632.

Riggle, E. D. B., & Johnson, M. M. S. (1996). Age differences in political decision making:Strategies for evaluating political candidates. Political Behavior, 18, 99-118.

Roets, A., & Van Hiel, A. (2011). Impaired performance as a source of reduced energy investment in judgement under stressors. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23(5), 625-632.

Roets, A., Van Hiel, A., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2013). When motivation backfires:Optimal levels of motivation as a function of cognitive capacity in information relevance perception and social judgment. Motivation and Emotion, 37(2), 261-273.

Salthouse, T. A. (2004). What and when of cognitive aging. Current directions in psychological science, 13(4), 140-144.

Samanez-Larkin, G. R., & Knutson, B. (2015) Decision making in the ageing brain:Changes in affective and motivational circuits. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 15(5), 278-289.

Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (2007). Feelings and phenomenal experiences.In E. T. Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds.),Social psychology:Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 385-407). New York, NY:Guilford Press.

Stephens, E.C., & Johnson, M.M.S. (2000). Dr. Mom and other influences on younger and older adults' OTC medication purchases. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 19, 441-459.

Vastfjall, D., & Slovic, P. (2013). Cognition and emotion in judgment and decision making. Handbook of cognition and emotion, 252-271.

Von Helversen, B., & Mata, R. (2012). Losing a dime with a satisfied mind:Positive affect predicts less search in sequential decision making. Psychology and aging, 27(4), 825-839.

Yoon, C., Cole, C. A., & Lee, M. P. (2009). Consumer decision making and aging:Current knowledge and future directions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, 1-16.

Zaval, L., Li, Y., Johnson, E., & Weber, E. (2015). Complementary contributions of fluid and crystallized intelligence to decision making across the life span. In T. Hess, J. Strough, & C. Löckenhoff (Eds). Aging and decision making:Empirical and applied perspectives. San Diego:Elsevier Academic Press (pp. 149-168).

陈军.(2009).归因风格，时间压力对决策信息加工的影响.心理科学， 32(6)，1445-1447.

刘永芳, 苏丽娜, 王怀勇.(2011).女性择偶决策的线索偏好及信息加工方式.心理学报, 43(1), 21-29.

梅敏君, 王大伟.(2009).情绪对职业决策的影响.心理科学, 32, 986-988.

余雯, 闫巩固, 黄志华.(2013).决策中的过程追踪技术:介绍与展望.心理科学进展,21,606-614.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

[1]	林崇德. 需要是教育与发展的动力源[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(1): 1-7.
[2]	沙晶莹, 张向葵, 刘千冬. 人以群分？学业动机比较对青少年同伴选择的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(5): 683-690.
[3]	李越, 辛自强, 兰艺华. 亲关系动机对家庭消费决策及婚姻满意度的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(3): 350-359.
[4]	刘双, 李梅, 冯晓杭, 张向葵. 幼儿掌控动机与能力关系的纵向研究:任务类型与气质的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(2): 161-172.
[5]	孙赛男, 何文广. 语音加工的发展、老化及其神经机制[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(6): 894-901.
[6]	郎悦茹, 龚少英, 曹阳, 吴亚男. 网络学习中师生交互与大学生学习投入的关系：自主动机与学业情绪的序列中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(4): 530-537.
[7]	王国霞, 赵扬. 教师自主支持与学生学业成就关系的元分析:心理需要满足、动机及投入的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(3): 380-390.
[8]	赵亚飞, 翟乡平, 张光旭, 梁鑫, 辛素飞. 成长型思维与坚毅的关系:未来时间洞察力和成就动机的链式中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(2): 216-222.
[9]	吴瑕, 钟希苹, 姜云鹏. 不同搜索情境下老化对自上而下注意加工的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(1): 26-34.
[10]	刘文, 王依宁, 张嘉琪, 车翰博. 9~11岁儿童创造性人格与欺骗行为的关系:亲子沟通质量的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(4): 508-516.
[11]	梁兴丽, 何津, 周佶俊, 刘萍萍. 认知能力对学业成绩的影响:有中介的调节模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(4): 449-461.
[12]	池文韬, 桑青松, 舒首立. 大学生专业内部动机与主观幸福感的关系:专业投入与主观专业成就的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(4): 477-485.
[13]	郑建君, 付晓洁. 利他动机对中小学教师知识共享的影响——组织认同和组织支持感的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(4): 421-429.
[14]	辛素飞, 王一鑫. 中国大学生成就动机变迁的横断历史研究:1999~2014[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(3): 288-294.
[15]	段朝辉, 洪建中. 网络视频课程中师生交互与大学生网络学习绩效的关系:学习自我效能感与学习动机的序列中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(2): 184-191.