, 1
9627 
6883判断和决策中的许多偏见现象都源自于决策者无意识或者有意识地将有偏差的不完全观测样本当成有代表性的整体。近些年以Fiedler、Juslin、Hertwig、Denrell、Le Mens等为代表的学者重点关注了这一信息样本的有偏采集问题，为研究决策偏见的形成机理提供了新的采样偏差视角。本文对这一视角进行了系统性述评，厘清了“采样”的概念内涵，阐述了采样偏差导致决策偏见的基本机制，并对采样偏差引起的一种典型偏见效应——“描述—经验”差异进行了重点剖析，最后归纳了几个融入采样偏差思想的重要决策模型。作为结论，本文指出，决策偏见研究需要关注信息采样问题，尤其关注决策信息环境的哪些特征更易导致个体对信息样本的有偏采集。本文研究丰富了决策偏见的理论视角，对于洞悉和改进人类有限理性决策具有一定的实践指导意义。
信息样本的有偏采集如何导致决策偏见？——基于采样偏差的新视角述评
摘要
参考文献
1 李艾丽莎, 张庆林. 决策的选择偏好研究述评[J]. 心理科学进展, 2006, （4）: 618–624.
2 刘腾飞, 徐富明, 马红宇, 等. 行为决策研究的新取向——基于经验的决策[J]. 心理科学进展, 2012, （7）: 1068–1079.
4 Anderson M C, Bjork R A, Bjork E L. Remembering can cause forgetting: Retrieval dynamics in long-term memory[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1994, 20（5）: 1063–1087. DOI:10.1037/0278-7393.20.5.1063
5 Appelt K C, Hardisty D J, Weber E U. Asymmetric discounting of gains and losses: A query theory account[J]. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 2011, 43（2）: 107–126. DOI:10.1007/s11166-011-9125-1
6 Asch S E. Opinions and social pressure[J]. Scientific American, 1955, 193（5）: 31–35. DOI:10.1038/scientificamerican1155-31
7 Barron G, Ursino G. Underweighting rare events in experience based decisions: Beyond sample error[J]. Journal of Economic Psychology, 2013, 39: 278–286. DOI:10.1016/j.joep.2013.09.002
8 Baumeister R F, Leary M R. The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation[J]. Psychological Bulletin, 1995, 117（3）: 497–529. DOI:10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
9 Bhatia S. Associations and the accumulation of preference[J]. Psychological Review, 2013, 120（3）: 522–543. DOI:10.1037/a0032457
10 Brown G D A, Gardner J, Oswald A J, et al. Does wage rank affect employees’ well-being?[J]. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 2008, 47（3）: 355–389. DOI:10.1111/j.1468-232X.2008.00525.x
11 Busemeyer J R, Johnson J G. Micro-process models of decision making[A]. Sun R. The Cambridge handbook of computational psychology[M]. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 2008: 302–321.
12 Busemeyer J R, Townsend J T. Decision field theory: A dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment[J]. Psychological Review, 1993, 100（3）: 432–459. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.100.3.432
13 Camilleri A R, Newell B R. The long and short of it: Closing the description-experience " gap” by taking the long-run view[J]. Cognition, 2013, 126（1）: 54–71. DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.09.001
14 Chaiken S, Liberman A, Eagly A H. Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context[A]. Uleman J S, Bargh J A. Unintended thought[M]. New York: Guilford, 1989: 212–252.
15 Chambers J R, Windschitl P D. Biases in social comparative judgments: the role of nonmotivated factors in above-average and comparative-optimism effects[J]. Psychological Bulletin, 2004, 130（5）: 813–838. DOI:10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.813
16 Cowan N. Metatheory of storage capacity limits[J]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2001, 24（1）: 154–176.
17 Davidai S, Gilovich T, Ross L D. The meaning of default options for potential organ donors[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2012, 109（38）: 15201–15205. DOI:10.1073/pnas.1211695109
18 Denrell J. Why most people disapprove of me: Experience sampling in impression formation[J]. Psychological Review, 2005, 112（4）: 951–978. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.951
19 Denrell J, Le Mens G. Information sampling, conformity and collective mistaken beliefs[A]. Proceedings of the 35th annual conference of the cognitive science society[C]. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society, 2013: 2177–2182.
20 Denrell J, Le Mens G. Information sampling, belief synchronization, and collective illusions[J]. Management Science, 2016, 63（2）: 528–547.
21 Diederich A. Dynamic stochastic models for decision making under time constraints[J]. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1997, 41（3）: 260–274. DOI:10.1006/jmps.1997.1167
23 Ditto P H, Scepansky J A, Munro G D, et al. Motivated sensitivity to preference-inconsistent information[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1998, 75（1）: 53–69. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.53
24 Dufau S, Grainger J, Ziegler J C. How to say " no” to a nonword: A leaky competing accumulator model of lexical decision[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2012, 38（4）: 1117–1128. DOI:10.1037/a0026948
25 Feiler D C, Tong J D, Larrick R P. Biased judgment in censored environments[J]. Management Science, 2013, 59（3）: 573–591. DOI:10.1287/mnsc.1120.1612
26 Fiedler K. Beware of samples! A cognitive-ecological sampling approach to judgment biases[J]. Psychological Review, 2000, 107（4）: 659–676. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.107.4.659
27 Fiedler K. Information ecology and the explanation of social cognition and behavior[A]. Kruglanski A, Higgins E T. Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles[M]. 2nd ed. New York: Guilford, 2007: 176–200.
28 Fiedler K, Juslin P. Taking the interface between mind and environment seriously[A]. Fiedler K, Juslin P. Information sampling and adaptive cognition[M]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006: 1–29.
29 Fox C R, Hadar L. " Decisions from experience”=sampling error+prospect theory: Reconsidering Hertwig, Barron, Weber & Erev （2004）[J]. Judgment and Decision Making, 2006, 1（2）: 159–161.
30 Galesic M, Olsson H, Rieskamp J. Social sampling explains apparent biases in judgments of social environments[J]. Psychological Science, 2012, 23（12）: 1515–1523. DOI:10.1177/0956797612445313
31 Glöckner A, Hilbig B E, Henninger F, et al. The reversed description-experience gap: Disentangling sources of presentation format effects in risky choice[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2016, 145（4）: 486–508. DOI:10.1037/a0040103
32 Goldstein D G, Johnson E J, Herrmann A, et al. Nudge your customers toward better choices[J]. Harvard Business Review, 2008, 86（12）: 99–105.
33 Hardisty D J, Johnson E J, Weber E U. A dirty word or a dirty world? Attribute framing, political affiliation, and query theory[J]. Psychological Science, 2010, 21（1）: 86–92. DOI:10.1177/0956797609355572
34 Hau R, Pleskac T J, Kiefer J, et al. The description-experience gap in risky choice: The role of sample size and experienced probabilities[J]. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2008, 21（5）: 493–518. DOI:10.1002/bdm.v21:5
35 Hau R, Pleskac T J, Hertwig R. Decisions from experience and statistical probabilities: Why they trigger different choices than a priori probabilities[J]. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2010, 23（1）: 48–68. DOI:10.1002/bdm.v23:1
36 Hertwig R, Barron G, Weber E U, et al. Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice[J]. Psychological Science, 2004, 15（8）: 534–539. DOI:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00715.x
37 Hertwig R, Erev I. The description-experience gap in risky choice[J]. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2009, 13（12）: 517–523. DOI:10.1016/j.tics.2009.09.004
38 Hertwig R, Pleskac T J. The game of life: How small samples render choice simpler[A]. Chater N, Oaksford M. The probabilistic mind: Prospects for Bayesian cognitive science[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008: 209–236.
39 Hertwig R, Pleskac T J. Decisions from experience: Why small samples?[J]. Cognition, 2010, 115（2）: 225–237. DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.12.009
40 Hills T T, Hertwig R. Information search in decisions from experience: Do our patterns of sampling foreshadow our decisions?[J]. Psychological Science, 2010, 21（12）: 1787–1792. DOI:10.1177/0956797610387443
41 Huber J, Payne J W, Puto C. Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1982, 9（1）: 90–98. DOI:10.1086/jcr.1982.9.issue-1
42 Johnson E J, Goldstein D. Do defaults save lives?[J]. Science, 2003, 302（5649）: 1338–1339. DOI:10.1126/science.1091721
43 Johnson E J, Häubl G, Keinan A. Aspects of endowment: A query theory of value construction[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2007, 33（3）: 461–474. DOI:10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.461
44 Juslin P, Winman A, Hansson P. The naïve intuitive statistician: a naive sampling model of intuitive confidence intervals[J]. Psychological Review, 2007, 114（3）: 678–703. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.114.3.678
45 Kahneman D. Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics[J]. The American Economic Review, 2003, 93（5）: 1449–1475. DOI:10.1257/000282803322655392
46 Kahneman D, Frederick S. Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment[A]. Gilovich T, Griffin D, Kahneman D. Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment[M]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002: 49–81.
47 Kahneman D, Tversky A. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk[J]. Econometrica, 1979, 47（2）: 263–292. DOI:10.2307/1914185
48 Kareev Y. Seven（indeed, plus or minus two）and the detection of correlations[J]. Psychological Review, 2000, 107（2）: 397–402. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.107.2.397
49 Kareev Y. Good sampling, distorted views[A]. Fielder K, Juslin P. Information sampling and adaptive cognition[M]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006: 33–52.
50 Khemlani S S, Oppenheimer D M. When one model casts doubt on another: A levels-of-analysis approach to causal discounting[J]. Psychological Bulletin, 2011, 137（2）: 195–210. DOI:10.1037/a0021809
51 Koehler J J, Mercer M. Selection neglect in mutual fund advertisements[J]. Management Science, 2009, 55（7）: 1107–1121. DOI:10.1287/mnsc.1090.1013
52 Le Mens G, Denrell J. Rational learning and information sampling: On the " naivety” assumption in sampling explanations of judgment biases[J]. Psychological Review, 2011, 118（2）: 379–392. DOI:10.1037/a0023010
53 Lejarraga T. When experience is better than description: Time delays and complexity[J]. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2010, 23（1）: 100–116. DOI:10.1002/bdm.v23:1
54 Lejarraga T, Hertwig R, Gonzalez C. How choice ecology influences search in decisions from experience[J]. Cognition, 2012, 124（3）: 334–342. DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.06.002
55 Lord C G, Ross L, Lepper M R. Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1979, 37（11）: 2098–2109. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098
57 Miller G A. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information[J]. Psychological Review, 1956, 63（2）: 81–97. DOI:10.1037/h0043158
58 Moore D A, Small D A. Error and bias in comparative judgment: on being both better and worse than we think we are[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2007, 92（6）: 972–989. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.972
59 Muchnik L, Aral S, Taylor S J. Social influence bias: A randomized experiment[J]. Science, 2013, 341（6146）: 647–651. DOI:10.1126/science.1240466
60 Olivola C Y, Sagara N. Distributions of observed death tolls govern sensitivity to human fatalities[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2009, 106（52）: 22151–22156. DOI:10.1073/pnas.0908980106
61 Oppenheimer D M, Kelso E. Information processing as a paradigm for decision making[J]. Annual Review of Psychology, 2015, 66: 277–294. DOI:10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015148
63 Petty R E, Cacioppo J T. Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change[M]. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1986.
64 Polman E, Russo J E. Commitment to a developing preference and predecisional distortion of information[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2012, 119（1）: 78–88. DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.05.004
65 Proeger T, Meub L. Overconfidence as a social bias: Experimental evidence[J]. Economics Letters, 2014, 122（2）: 203–207. DOI:10.1016/j.econlet.2013.11.027
66 Rakow T, Demes K A, Newell B R. Biased samples not mode of presentation: Re-examining the apparent underweighting of rare events in experience-based choice[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2008, 106（2）: 168–179. DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.02.001
67 Rakow T, Newell B R. Degrees of uncertainty: An overview and framework for future research on experience-based choice[J]. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2010, 23（1）: 1–14. DOI:10.1002/bdm.v23:1
68 Roe R M, Busemeyer J R, Townsend J T. Multialternative decision field theory: A dynamic connectionist model of decision making[J]. Psychological Review, 2001, 108（2）: 370–392. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.370
69 Russo J E, Carlson K A, Meloy M G, et al. The goal of consistency as a cause of information distortion[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2008, 137（3）: 456–470. DOI:10.1037/a0012786
70 Sanborn A N, Chater N. Bayesian brains without probabilities[J]. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2016, 20（12）: 883–893. DOI:10.1016/j.tics.2016.10.003
71 Simon H A. Rational choice and the structure of the environment[J]. Psychological Review, 1956, 63（2）: 129–138. DOI:10.1037/h0042769
72 Simon H A. Models of bounded rationality: Empirically grounded economic reason[M]. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1982.
73 Simonson I. Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1989, 16（2）: 158–174. DOI:10.1086/jcr.1989.16.issue-2
74 Stewart N, Chater N, Brown G D A. Decision by sampling[J]. Cognitive Psychology, 2006, 53（1）: 1–26. DOI:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.10.003
76 Thaler R H, Sunstein C R. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness[M]. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008.
78 Trueblood J S, Brown S D, Heathcote A. The multiattribute linear ballistic accumulator model of context effects in multialternative choice[J]. Psychological Review, 2014, 121（2）: 179–205. DOI:10.1037/a0036137
79 Tsetsos K, Gao J, McClelland J L, et al. Using time-varying evidence to test models of decision dynamics: Bounded diffusion vs. the leaky competing accumulator model[J]. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 2012, 6: 79.
80 Tversky A. Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice[J]. Psychological Review, 1972, 79（4）: 281–299. DOI:10.1037/h0032955
81 Tversky A. Features of similarity[J]. Psychological Review, 1977, 84（4）: 327–352. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.84.4.327
82 Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases[J]. Science, 1974, 185（4157）: 1124–1131. DOI:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
83 Tversky A, Kahneman D. Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1991, 106（4）: 1039–1061. DOI:10.2307/2937956
84 Ungemach C, Stewart N, Reimers S. How incidental values from the environment affect decisions about money, risk, and delay[J]. Psychological Science, 2011, 22（2）: 253–260. DOI:10.1177/0956797610396225
85 Usher M, McClelland J L. The time course of perceptual choice: The leaky, competing accumulator model[J]. Psychological Review, 2001, 108（3）: 550–592. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.550
86 Usher M, McClelland J L. Loss aversion and inhibition in dynamical models of multialternative choice[J]. Psychological Review, 2004, 111（3）: 757–769. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.111.3.757
87 Vul E, Goodman N, Griffiths T L, et al. One and done? Optimal decisions from very few samples[J]. Cognitive Science, 2014, 38（4）: 599–637. DOI:10.1111/cogs.12101
88 Wang T, Wang D S. Why Amazon’s ratings might mislead you: The story of herding effects[J]. Big Data, 2014, 2（4）: 196–204. DOI:10.1089/big.2014.0063
89 Weber E U, Johnson E J, Milch K F, et al. Asymmetric discounting in intertemporal choice: A query-theory account[J]. Psychological Science, 2007, 18（6）: 516–523. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01932.x
90 Weber E U, Shafir S, Blais A R. Predicting risk sensitivity in humans and lower animals: Risk as variance or coefficient of variation[J]. Psychological Review, 2004, 111（2）: 430–445. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.430
91 Wulff D U, Hills T T, Hertwig R. Online product reviews and the description-experience gap[J]. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2015, 28（3）: 214–223. DOI:10.1002/bdm.v28.3
引用本文
马丹丹, 岑咏华, 吴承尧. 信息样本的有偏采集如何导致决策偏见？——基于采样偏差的新视角述评[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2017, 39(12): 23–37.
导出参考文献，格式为：
