Please wait a minute...
Advances in Psychological Science    2017, Vol. 25 Issue (1) : 169-179     DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2017.00169
Regular Articles |
Advice taking in decision-making: Strategies, influences and feature research
SUN Luying1; CHEN Lin1; DUAN Jinyun1,2,3
(1 Department of Psychology, Soochow University; 2 Key Research Institute of Education Ministry-Center for Chinese Urbanization Studies, Soochow University; 3 Dongwu Thinktank, Soochow University, Suzhou 215123, China)
Download: PDF(421 KB)  
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks    

Others’ advice can help decision makers improve the quality of their decision. However, most decision makers can not choose the appropriate strategy of advice taking. In other words, they tend to underestimate the efficiency of averaging strategy and use the egoistic weighting strategy. Factors affecting advice taking were listed as followings. The first was advice features, such as the advice types and advice numbers. The second one was task features. Then the judge’s features, including their power, emotion, self-esteem, cognitive style and complexity. The last one was the advisor factors, such as the advisor’s similarity with the decision maker, the adviser’s confidence and reliability, all of which can affect advice taking. Feature research should explore how the type of advisor power, as well the evaluation sensitivity of decision maker may influence the degree of advice taking. Secondly, the nominal advice-taking is also a good topic in China. Additionally, more attention is compulsory for the area of advice giving so that the research field of advice could be enriched and developed constantly.

Keywords advice taking      advice discounting effect      Judge-Advisor System      advice taking strategies      influencing factors     
Corresponding Authors: DUAN Jinyun, E-mail:   
Issue Date: 15 January 2017
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
Articles by authors
SUN Luying
DUAN Jinyun
Cite this article:   
SUN Luying,CHEN Lin,DUAN Jinyun. Advice taking in decision-making: Strategies, influences and feature research[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2017, 25(1): 169-179.
URL:     OR
[1] CHEN Lin,TIAN Xiaoming,DUAN Jinyun. The cognitive mechanism of advice taking[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(1): 149-159.
[2] MENG Zhu, YAN Guoli.  Mechanism of the irrelevant speech effect in reading: Is the interference determined by content, or process?[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(2): 262-269.
[3] ZHU Yuelong, ZHANG Kaihua, DUAN Jinyun.  The emotion mechanism of advice taking[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2017, 25(9): 1607-1613.
[4] WANG Qi; HU Jinsheng; LI Chengshi; LI Songze; . The emotional prosody recognition in autism spectrum disorders[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(9): 1377-1390.
[5] PENG Yunshuang; WANG Xue; WU Song; JIN Shenghua; SUN Rongfang. A brief introduction of Life History Theory and its combination with social psychology: Moral behaviors as an example[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(3): 464-474.
[6] BAI Lin; CHEN Chen; CHEN Huiwen. Consumer Guilt: The Frontier Analysis of Dimension, Process and Empirical Research[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2015, 23(10): 1818-1829.
[7] ZHONG Xin;LIU Juhong;CHEN Xu. Adolescent Peer Attachment: A Developmental Perspective[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014, 22(7): 1149-1158.
[8] XU Jing-Zhe;XIE Xiao-Fei. Advice Taking in Decision-making Process[J]. , 2009, 17(05): 1016-1025.
[9] LI Yue-Ran;LI Shu. The Retrospect and Prospect of Judge-Advisor System Model[J]. , 2009, 17(05): 1026-1032.
Full text



Copyright © Advances in Psychological Science
Support by Beijing Magtech