从经济领域到社会领域：决策中的不确定性&#x0002A;

薛靖华; 朱睿达; 刘超

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240216

PDF(619 KB)

心理科学 ›› 2024, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (2) : 384-392. DOI: 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240216

社会、人格与管理

从经济领域到社会领域：决策中的不确定性^*

薛靖华¹, 朱睿达^**2, 刘超^**1

作者信息 +

From the Economic Domain to the Social Domain: Uncertainty in Decision-Making

Xue Jinghua¹, Zhu Ruida², Liu Chao¹

Author information +

文章历史 +

摘要

不确定性指个体根据已有信息进行预测的精确程度。文章梳理了来源于经济领域和社会领域的不确定性研究,发现不确定性普遍引发个体的消极情绪。通过剖析两个领域的不确定性对心理和行为的影响路径,发现经济决策中的不确定性首先引发注意和记忆的认知资源变化,促进个体采取灵活的学习策略,随后影响对奖惩的评估。社会决策中的不确定性首先影响针对他人的预测推断,进而影响人际互动策略,随后影响对互动结果的社会学习。最后针对过往研究存在的不足,提出未来值得研究的方向。

Abstract

Due to the limitation of information and environmental factors, uncertainty widely exists in various kinds of decision-making. Uncertainty refers to the degree of precision with which individuals can make predictions based on available information. In the economic domain, uncertainty revolves around probabilistic information regarding monetary gains or losses and investigates individuals' choices in the face of uncertain financial outcomes. While research on uncertainty in the economic domain is well-established, recent efforts have focused on understanding uncertainty in the social domain. Social interactions often involve numerous uncertain decisions due to challenges in understanding others' intentions and behaviors. Social uncertainty reflects the degree to which individuals' uncertainty about their own future states and actions is influenced by uncertainty about others' states and actions. Uncertainty in both the economic and social domains presents distinct categories of challenges that humans encounter and endeavor to resolve. The "social brain" hypothesis posits that individuals may employ different cognitive and neural mechanisms when processing social information in contrast to non-social information. Hence, it is crucial to investigate the shared and distinctive psychological and neural mechanisms individuals employ when confronted with uncertainty in these separate domains.
This paper will first introduce the fundamental theory of uncertainty research, which categorizes uncertainty into risk uncertainty and ambiguity uncertainty based on the availability of existing information. Risk uncertainty involves explicit probabilities associated with potential outcomes, whereas ambiguity uncertainty involves unknown probabilities associated with potential outcomes. Additionally, important models such as the Subjective Expected Utility Model and the Max-min Expected Utility Model help quantify individuals' cognitive processes in response to uncertainty, with the latter effectively distinguishing and quantifying individuals' attitudes towards risk and ambiguity. Subsequently, this paper will expound upon the shared impacts of uncertainty in the economic and social domains on emotional responses. Faced with uncertainty, individuals tend to exhibit a degree of aversion and often seek to avoid or reduce uncertainty. Furthermore, uncertainty aversion has been correlated with activation in the anterior insula. The distinct influence of uncertainty in the economic and social domains on individual psychology and behavior will be discussed, along with the underlying cognitive and neural mechanisms. Through comparing and analyzing the differences between uncertainty in the economic domain and the social domain, it shows that social uncertainty encompasses broader and more complex sources compared to the economic domain. Uncertainty in economic decision-making initially triggers changes in attention and cognitive resources, and facilitates the adoption of corresponding learning mechanisms and behavioral strategies. Ultimately, it influences the evaluation of economic outcomes in terms of rewards and punishments. Conversely, uncertainty in social decision-making affects the initial assessments of others, subsequently influencing interaction strategies, and involving feedback and social learning derived from the outcomes of social interactions.
Regarding the differences in the impact pathways of uncertainty within these two domains, we further integrate them into three stages: the initial stage, the action stage, and the feedback stage. Overall, individuals exhibit distinct cognitive strategies and behavioral patterns across these three stages of economic and social decision-making under the influence of uncertainty, which supports the "social brain" hypothesis to some extent. Individuals aim to reduce uncertainty to make future states and outcomes more predictable. But the specific goals and execution processes differ between the economic and social domains. The "social brain" hypothesis contributes to a better understanding of the differences in the impact of uncertainty in these two domains.
In conclusion, this paper summarizes the limitations of the current study and provides some recommendations for future research. Future research should explore the differential impact of risk and ambiguity attitudes, examine the benefits of uncertainty and related neural mechanisms, draw insights from classical paradigms and models within the economic domain to study uncertainty within the social domain, and investigate the transferability and generalizability of uncertainty effects between the economic and social domains.

导出引用

薛靖华, 朱睿达, 刘超. 从经济领域到社会领域：决策中的不确定性^*[J]. 心理科学. 2024, 47(2): 384-392 https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240216

Xue Jinghua, Zhu Ruida, Liu Chao. From the Economic Domain to the Social Domain: Uncertainty in Decision-Making[J]. Journal of Psychological Science. 2024, 47(2): 384-392 https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240216

参考文献

[1] Adolphs, R. (2009). The social brain: Neural basis of social knowledge. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 693-716.
[2] Anderson K. G., Deschênes S. S., & Dugas M. J. (2016). Experimental manipulation of avoidable feelings of uncertainty: Effects on anger and anxiety. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 41, 50-58.
[3] Atzil S., Gao W., Fradkin I., & Barrett L. F. (2018). Growing a social brain. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(9), 624-636.
[4] Aylward J., Valton V., Ahn W. Y., Bond R. L., Dayan P., Roiser J. P., & Robinson O. J. (2019). Altered learning under uncertainty in unmedicated mood and anxiety disorders. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(10), 1116-1123.
[5] Bach, D. R., & Dolan, R. J. (2012). Knowing how much you don't know: A neural organization of uncertainty estimates. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 13(8), 572-586.
[6] Báez-Mendoza, R., & Schultz, W. (2013). The role of the striatum in social behavior. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 7, 233.
[7] Bartra O., McGuire J. T., & Kable J. W. (2013). The valuation system: A coordinate-based meta-analysis of BOLD fMRI experiments examining neural correlates of subjective value. NeuroImage, 76, 412-427.
[8] Beesley T., Nguyen K. P., Pearson D., & Le Pelley, M. E. (2015). Uncertainty and predictiveness determine attention to cues during human associative learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(11), 2175-2199.
[9] Bellucci G., Chernyak S. V., Goodyear K., Eickhoff S. B., & Krueger F. (2017). Neural signatures of trust in reciprocity: A coordinate-based meta-analysis. Human Brain Mapping, 38(3), 1233-1248.
[10] Blankenstein N. E., Huettel S. A., & Li R. (2021). Resolving ambiguity: Broadening the consideration of risky decision making over adolescent development. Developmental Review, 62, 100987.
[11] Blankenstein N. E., Peper J. S., Crone E. A., & van Duijvenvoorde, A. C. K. (2017). Neural mechanisms underlying risk and ambiguity attitudes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 29(11), 1845-1859.
[12] Blankenstein N. E., Schreuders E., Peper J. S., Crone E. A., & van Duijvenvoorde, A. C. K. (2018). Individual differences in risk-taking tendencies modulate the neural processing of risky and ambiguous decision-making in adolescence. NeuroImage, 172, 663-673.
[13] Brass, M., & von Cramon, D. Y. (2004). Selection for cognitive control: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study on the selection of task-relevant information. Journal of Neuroscience, 24(40), 8847-8852.
[14] Chen S. Q., Yao N. S., & Qian M. Y. (2018). The influence of uncertainty and intolerance of uncertainty on anxiety. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 61, 60-65.
[15] Cole E. J., Barraclough N. E., & Andrews T. J. (2019). Reduced connectivity between mentalizing and mirror systems in autism spectrum condition. Neuropsychologia, 122, 88-97.
[16] Crone, E. A., & van Duijvenvoorde, A. C. K. (2021). Multiple pathways of risk taking in adolescence. Developmental Review, 62, 100996.
[17] Diaconescu A. O., Mathys C., Weber L. A. E., Daunizeau J., Kasper L., Lomakina E. I., & Stephan K. E. (2014). Inferring on the intentions of others by hierarchical Bayesian learning. PLoS Computational Biology, 10(9), e1003810.
[18] Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75(4), 643-669.
[19] Fairley K., Vyrastekova J., Weitzel U., & Sanfey A. G. (2022). Beyond lottery-evoked ambiguity aversion: The neural signature of the types and the sources of uncertainty. NeuroImage, 251, 119007.
[20] FeldmanHall O., Glimcher P., Baker A. L., NYU PROSPEC Collaboration, & Phelps, E. A. (2019). The functional roles of the amygdala and prefrontal cortex in processing uncertainty. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 31(11), 1742-1754.
[21] FeldmanHall O., Glimcher P., Baker A. L., & Phelps E. A. (2016). Emotion and decision-making under uncertainty: Physiological arousal predicts increased gambling during ambiguity but not risk. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(10), 1255-1262.
[22] FeldmanHall, O., & Shenhav, A. (2019). Resolving uncertainty in a social world. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(5), 426-435.
[23] Fetchenhauer, D., & Dunning, D. (2012). Betrayal aversion versus principled trustfulness—How to explain risk avoidance and risky choices in trust games. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 81(2), 534-541.
[24] Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 1-74.
[25] Furnham, A., & Marks, J. (2013). Tolerance of ambiguity: A review of the recent literature. Psychology, 4(9), 717-728.
[26] Gilboa, I., & Schmeidler, D. (1989). Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 18(2), 141-153.
[27] Golman R., Gurney N., & Loewenstein G. (2021). Information gaps for risk and ambiguity. Psychological Review, 128(1), 86-103.
[28] Griffin, M. A., & Grote, G. (2020). When is more uncertainty better? A model of uncertainty regulation and effectiveness. Academy of Management Review, 45(4), 745-765.
[29] Gross J., Faber N. S., Kappes A., Nussberger A. M., Cowen P. J., Browning M., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2021). When helping is risky: The behavioral and neurobiological trade-off of social and risk preferences. Psychological Science, 32(11), 1842-1855.
[30] Haisley, E. C., & Weber, R. A. (2010). Self-serving interpretations of ambiguity in other-regarding behavior. Games and Economic Behavior, 68(2), 614-625.
[31] Han S. D., Boyle P. A., Arfanakis K., Fleischman D. A., Yu L., Edmonds E. C., & Bennett D. A. (2012). Neural intrinsic connectivity networks associated with risk aversion in old age. Behavioural Brain Research, 227(1), 233-240.
[32] Hogg, M. A. (2021). Self-uncertainty and group identification: Consequences for social identity, group behavior, intergroup relations, and society. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 64, 263-316.
[33] Hsee, C. K., & Ruan, B. W. (2016). The pandora effect: The power and peril of curiosity. Psychological Science, 27(5), 659-666.
[34] Hsu M., Bhatt M., Adolphs R., Tranel D., & Camerer C. F. (2005). Neural systems responding to degrees of uncertainty in human decision-making. Science, 310(5754), 1680-1683.
[35] Huettel S. A., Song A. W., & McCarthy G. (2005). Decisions under uncertainty: Probabilistic context influences activation of prefrontal and parietal cortices. The Journal of Neuroscience, 25(13), 3304-3311.
[36] Huettel S. A., Stowe C. J., Gordon E. M., Warner B. T., & Platt M. L. (2006). Neural signatures of economic preferences for risk and ambiguity. Neuron, 49(5), 765-775.
[37] Jung Y. C., Schulte T., Müller-Oehring E. M., Hawkes W., Namkoong K., Pfefferbaum A., & Sullivan E. V. (2014). Synchrony of anterior cingulate cortex and insular-striatal activation predicts ambiguity aversion in individuals with low impulsivity. Cerebral Cortex, 24(5), 1397-1408.
[38] Kappes A., Nussberger A. M., Faber N. S., Kahane G., Savulescu J., & Crockett M. J. (2018). Uncertainty about the impact of social decisions increases prosocial behaviour. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(8), 573-580.
[39] Kappes A., Nussberger A. M., Siegel J. Z., Rutledge R. B., & Crockett M. J. (2019). Social uncertainty is heterogeneous and sometimes valuable. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(8), 764-764.
[40] Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty and profit. Houghton Mifflin.
[41] Krain A. L., Wilson A. M., Arbuckle R., Castellanos F. X., & Milham M. P. (2006). Distinct neural mechanisms of risk and ambiguity: A meta-analysis of decision-making. NeuroImage, 32(1), 477-484.
[42] Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: ''Seizing'' and ''Freezing''. Psychological Review, 103(2), 263-283.
[43] Kugler T., Connolly T., & Ordóñez L. D. (2012). Emotion, decision, and risk: Betting on gambles versus betting on people. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25(2), 123-134.
[44] Lamba A., Frank M. J., & FeldmanHall O. (2020). Anxiety impedes adaptive social learning under uncertainty. Psychological Science, 31(5), 592-603.
[45] Lamnina, M., & Chase, C. C. (2019). Developing a thirst for knowledge: How uncertainty in the classroom influences curiosity, affect, learning, and transfer. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 59, 101785.
[46] Laposa, J. M., & Fracalanza, K. (2019). Does intolerance of uncertainty mediate improvement in anger during group CBT for GAD? A preliminary investigation. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 47(5), 585-593.
[47] Levy I., Snell J., Nelson A. J., Rustichini A., & Glimcher P. W. (2010). Neural representation of subjective value under risk and ambiguity. Journal of Neurophysiology, 103(2), 1036-1047.
[48] Lockwood P. L., Apps M. A. J., & Chang, S. W. C. (2020). Is there a 'Social' brain? implementations and algorithms. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(10), 802-813.
[49] Martinez-Saito, M., & Gorina, E. (2022). Learning under social versus nonsocial uncertainty: A meta-analytic approach. Human Brain Mapping, 43(13), 4185-4206.
[50] Mitchell, J. P. (2009). Social psychology as a natural kind. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(6), 246-251.
[51] Monosov, I. E. (2020). How outcome uncertainty mediates attention, learning, and decision-making. Trends in Neurosciences, 43(10), 795-809.
[52] Poudel R., Riedel M. C., Salo T., Flannery J. S., Hill-Bowen L. D., Eickhoff S. B., & Sutherland M. T. (2020). Common and distinct brain activity associated with risky and ambiguous decision-making. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 209, 107884.
[53] Raio C. M., Lu B. B., Grubb M., Shields G. S., Slavich G. M., & Glimcher P. (2022). Cumulative lifetime stressor exposure assessed by the STRAIN predicts economic ambiguity aversion. Nature Communications, 13(1), 1686.
[54] Randles D., Benjamin R., Martens J. P., & Heine S. J. (2018). Searching for answers in an uncertain world: Meaning threats lead to increased working memory capacity. PLoS ONE, 13(10), e0204640.
[55] Rouhani N., Norman K. A., & Niv Y. (2018). Dissociable effects of surprising rewards on learning and memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(9), 1430-1443.
[56] Savage, L. J. (1972). The foundations of statistics. Dover Publications, Inc.
[57] Shen L. X., Fishbach A., & Hsee C. K. (2015). The motivating-uncertainty effect: Uncertainty increases resource investment in the process of reward pursuit. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(5), 1301-1315.
[58] Shou Y. Y., De Silva H. S., & Olney J. (2022). Attitudes toward ambiguous situations resemble the domain-specificity of attitudes toward risk. Personality and Individual Differences, 195, 111667.
[59] Stojić H., Orquin J. L., Dayan P., Dolan R. J., & Speekenbrink M. (2020). Uncertainty in learning, choice, and visual fixation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(6), 3291-3300.
[60] Tom S. M., Fox C. R., Trepel C., & Poldrack R. A. (2007). The neural basis of loss aversion in decision-making under risk. Science, 315(5811), 515-518.
[61] Trautmann S. T., Vieider F. M., & Wakker P. P. (2008). Causes of ambiguity aversion: Known versus unknown preferences. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 36(3), 225-243.
[62] Tsang, M. (2020). Estimating uncertainty aversion using the source method in stylized tasks with varying degrees of uncertainty. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 84, 101477.
[63] van den Berg P., Dewitte S., & Wenseleers T. (2021). Uncertainty causes humans to use social heuristics and to cooperate more: An experiment among Belgian university students. Evolution and Human Behavior, 42(3), 223-229.
[64] Vives, M. L., & FeldmanHall, O. (2018). Tolerance to ambiguous uncertainty predicts prosocial behavior. Nature Communications, 9, 2156.
[65] Walker A. R., Luque D., Le Pelley M. E., & Beesley T. (2019). The role of uncertainty in attentional and choice exploration. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 26(6), 1911-1916.
[66] Wu S. Y., Sun S., Camilleri J. A., Eickhoff S. B., & Yu R. J. (2021). Better the devil you know than the devil you don't: Neural processing of risk and ambiguity. NeuroImage, 236, 118109.