概率水平与模糊性对短视损失规避的影响  

The Effects of Probability and Ambiguity on the Myopic Loss Aversion

作　　者：徐富明[1,2] 李欧[1] 张慧[1] 李彬[1] 刘程浩[1] 

机构地区：[1]华中师范大学心理学院,武汉300079 [2]江西师范大学心理学院,南昌330022

出　　处：《心理科学》2016年第6期1366-1372,共7页Journal of Psychological Science

基　　金：国家自然科学基金面上项目(71571083)的资助

摘　　要：短视损失规避(MLA)是指如果投资者频繁地评估其投资回报,那么他在投资时就会减少对风险资产的投入。本文采用实验法探讨了任务概率水平与模糊性对MLA的影响。结果 MLA只存在于中等损失概率中,说明该现象并非普遍存在。一旦概率变得模糊,在高损失概率任务中会出现MLA,而在低损失概率任务中则出现反向的MLA,说明模糊性能扩展"短视"起作用的概率范围。The concept of myopic loss aversion （MLA）, introduced by Benartzi and Thaler （1995）, is important in behavioral economics. In the context of financial decision making, MLA implies that the more frequently returns of investments are evaluated, the lower is the average input in risky assets. Since it was put forward, researchers had been focusing on its conditions and influencing factors. A common feature of all the literature was that investment decisions were taken under risk, since individuals knew the probabilities of the tasks they were betting upon. However, it was almost impossible to know precisely the probabilities in real markets. Based on the contradiction, the present study discussed the influence of task probability on MLA, including probability level and ambiguity. The assumptions of the present paper were as follows： H1, task probability level had a remarkable influence on MLA; H2, probability ambiguity also had a significant influence on MLA. Experiment 1 used a random sampling method, employing 69 undergraduate students from a domestic university. Besides, the experimental process was presented on the computer monitor, and participants would make risk decision one by one in a quiet laboratory without distractions. The experiment 1 adopted a 2 （evaluation frequency： high vs. low） x 3 （probability level： high vs. medium vs. low） mixed design. In Experiment 2, the win probability was replaced by a letter ＂p＂ while the loss probability was replaced by ＂l-p＂. The study expanded the findings of experiment 1 with a 2 （valuation frequency： high vs. low） x 2 （probability level： high vs. low） between-subject design. A total of 380 undergraduate students were recruited. The other processes were the same as experiment 1. The results showed that both experiments did not find the main effects of evaluation frequency on MLA （in experiment 1： F（1,134） = 1.067,p = .305; in experiment 2： F（1,330） = .000,p = .985）, while the main effects of probability level

关 键 词：短视损失规避 概率水平 概率模糊性 

分 类 号：B842[哲学宗教—基础心理学]