ISSN 1671-3710
CN 11-4766/R

心理科学进展 ›› 2018, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (5): 928-938.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.00928

• 研究前沿 • 上一篇    下一篇



  1.  (中国科学院行为科学重点实验室(中国科学院心理研究所), 北京, 100101) (中国科学院大学心理学系, 北京 100049)
  • 收稿日期:2017-02-21 出版日期:2018-05-15 发布日期:2018-03-31
  • 通讯作者: 梁竹苑, E-mail: E-mail:E-mail:
  • 基金资助:
     国家自然科学基金项目(71471171, 71071150, 71761167001), 北京市自然科学基金项目(9172019), 中国科学院行为科学重点实验室自主研究课题(Y5CX052003)资助。

 New avenues for the development of domain-specific nature of risky decision making

 YUE Ling-Zi; LI Shu; LIANG Zhu-Yuan   

  1.  (CAS Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Beijing 100101, China) (Department of Psychology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)
  • Received:2017-02-21 Online:2018-05-15 Published:2018-03-31
  • Contact: LIANG Zhu-Yuan, E-mail: E-mail:E-mail:
  • Supported by:

摘要:  风险领域特异性指某特定领域内的风险决策和偏好可能会受到领域内特有的风险因素影响, 因而会导致领域特异性的行为。基于期望法则的风险决策理论认为, 风险倾向具有跨情境的稳定性。但近20年行为决策领域的证据表明, 风险倾向具有领域特异性, 其机制探索、测量工具和影响因素方面均取得了积极进展。从机制探索历程来看, 以往主流机制着重从风险−回报框架解构领域特异性的风险行为, 近年研究在丰富其机制检验证据的同时, 开始从进化、人格、动机等新的视角进行解读; 在测量工具层面, 领域特异性风险量表仍占主导地位, 并在多种文化、内容领域和群体间得到了进一步检验和扩展, 其他基于不同内容领域划分的风险领域特异性量表也具有较好的信效度; 在影响因素层面, 大量研究从遗传、环境、个体差异等角度探索了导致风险领域特异性的前因变量。未来研究方向应注重整合各风险内容领域, 在更加细化的风险领域检验现有理论, 并进一步探索个体层面的领域特异性规律。

关键词: 风险, 风险倾向, 风险领域, 领域特异性, 风险偏好

Abstract:  The term “risk-domain specificity” refers to the domain-specific nature of risky decision making due to the presence of factors that are particular to a certain content domain. Based on classical risky decision making theories stemming from laws of expectation, risk-taking propensity is domain-general. On the other hand, substantial evidences from past studies indicate that risk-taking propensity is domain-specific. The literature on risk-domain specificity has witnessed considerable progress in terms of mechanisms, measurements, and independent variables. Theoretically, early mainstream mechanisms deconstructed risk behavior based on a risk-return framework, whereas recent studies have validated the mechanisms with new sets of evidence and explained risk-domain specificity from the perspectives of evolution, personality and motivation. In terms of measurements, Domain-specific Risk Taking Scale (DOSPERT), as a dominant scale, has been further validated in various cultures, content domains, and groups. In comparison, other scales based on different content domains have been proven to be consistent and valid. In terms of independent variables, the regularity of risk-domain specificity has been proposed from various perspectives, such as genetics, environment and individual differences. Future research may focus on content domain integration and theory validation in detailed content domains as well as exploring regularity and mechanisms of risk-domain specificity at an individual level.

Key words: risk, risk-taking propensity, risk domains, domain specificity