| Several early psychological theories suggested that the experience of uncertainty and the tendency to avoid uncertain states may play much significant roles in the development and maintenance of anxiety and mood psychopathology. As studies intensifying, contemporary theories continued to emphasize the relations between uncertainty and psychopathology but many now distinguish between the state experience of uncertainty and an individual difference that has been termed tolerance of uncertainty(TU), which is defined as individual differences in the tendency to react emotionally, cognitively, or behaviorally to uncertain situations. People low in TU experience the possible occurrence of future negative events as stressful, believe that uncertainty is negative, reflects badly on a person, should be avoided, and have difficulties functioning well in uncertain situations. Many studies had shown that individuals low in TU appeared to have information processing biases. Evidence is accumulating that TU contributes to the symptoms associated with multiple anxiety and depressive disorders, and thus may be better understood as a transdiagnostic construct. Though TU has been related to a variety of cognitive and emotional constructs, it is still not clearly for us about the behavioral consequences of TU.For more than half a century, decision theory has been to examine the general rule of decision making, hammering at describing and explaining decision behavior through constructing mathematical models. However, the individual differences in decision making have long been ignored and rarely mentioned by considering it as error. Over decades, there are more and more researchers started using individual difference methods to examine and replenish former theories and conclusions. Uncertainty is an essential element of our relationship with the external world, but little research has been conducted to explore the influences of the individual differences in TU upon decision making.Therefore, this research mainly conducted five research with five experiments to examine the effects produced by TU on decision preference in risk decision making, ambiguity decision making, intertemporal choice and choice deferral under different tasks characteristics with the combination of the questionnaire and experimental methods. Specific description is as follows:In Study l, we revised the intolerance of uncertainty scale(IUS) in two college students samples and examined the reliability and validity of Chinese Revision of IUS. The result showed that Chinese Revision of IUS has good reliability and validity, and it can be used to measure the TU levels under the Chinese cultural background.Study 2 probed into the influences of TU on risk preferences in different experimental conditions. The experiment employed 2(tolerance of uncertainty: high vs. low)×2(gain-loss context: gain vs. loss)×2(outcome framing: positive vs. negative)×3(probabilities: high vs. median vs. low)mixed design with probabilities as the within-participants variable and the other three as between-participants variables. The results were as follows:(1)The main effects of TU were significant, subjects who have low scores on IUS were more willing to take risks than those who have high scores on IUS;(2)There was significant interaction between TU and gain-loss context on risk preference. the further analysis of simple effects showed that subjects who have low scores on IUS were more willing to take risks than subjects who have high scores on IUS in loss-context but not in gain-context;(3)There was also significant interaction between TU and the framing of options on risk preference, the further analysis of simple effects showed that subjects who have low scores on IUS were more willing to take risks than subjects who have high scores on IUS under the positive frame, but not under the negative frame; at the same time, the further analysis of simple effects also showed that people with high scores on IUS but not with low scores on IUS are affected by the framing effect.(4)There was no other significant interactions between TU and the other variables on risk preference.Study 3 investigated the influences of TU on decision preference in ambiguity decision-making. A total of 351 participants chose which option, ambiguous or known-risk, they preferred in the Ellsberg-type urns tasks in different experimental conditions. Therefore, it was a 2(tolerance of uncertainty: high vs. low)×2(gain-loss outcome: gain vs. loss)×3(probabilities: high vs. median vs. low)mixed design with probabilities as the within-participants variable and the other two as between-participants variables. The results showed that:(1)when the probability is large or small, there is no difference between the high and low TU groups in choosing the ambiguous urn whether in the gain condition or in the loss condition. When the probability is large, they were both trend to avoid ambiguity in the gain condition and switched to seek ambiguity in the loss condition. When the probability is small, they were both subject to be ambiguity neutral in the gain condition and switched to avoid ambiguity in the loss condition.(2)The participants with low TU showed significantly less ambiguity aversion compared with those with high TU when the probability of gain events is moderate, The former is ambiguity neutral, but the latter is ambiguity aversion; The participants with low TU are more likely to seek ambiguity compared with ones with high TU when probability of loss events is moderate, The former is ambiguity seeking, but the latter is ambiguity neutral.Study 4 probed into the relationship between TU and decision preference in intertemporal choice in different experimental conditions. Thus, this was a 2(tolerance of uncertainty: high vs.low)× 2(money amount: 200 yuan vs. 1000 yuan) × 2(delay time: 14 days vs. 180 days)mixed experimental design with money amount as the within-participants variable and the other two as between-participants variables. The results showed that: The main effects of money amount were significant, the discount factor in the large money amount level was higher than that in the small level, indicating the presence of a magnitude effect. The main effects of temporal distance were significant, indicating that the rate of discounting decreased when extending the received times of the rewards. Compared to the participants with high TU, the participants with low TU had a lower discount factor only when the rewarded money was set at 200 yuan to receive 180 days later. That is to say, Individuals with low TU overestimation of risk may lead to overestimation of the cost of revenue, which would result in his/her impulsive choices in intertemporal choices. There was no significant effect of TU on decision preference in intertemporal choice under the other task features.Study 5 investigated the influences of TU on choice deferral. This study included two experiments. Experiment 1 employed 2(tolerance of uncertainty: high vs. low)×2(probabilities: high vs. median)between-subject design to examine the effect of TU and probabilities on choice deferral in a risk-free condition, meaning that there are no risks associated with the delay of decision making. The results indicated that: There was significant interaction between TU and the levels of probability on decision preference. the further analysis showed that subjects who have high scores on IUS were more willing to select the deferral option more often than subjects who have low scores on IUS on median probability level, but not on high probability level. Experiment 2 employed single factor(tolerance of uncertainty: high vs. low)between subject design to examine the effect of TU on choice deferral in a risk condition, each day of delay was associated with a risk of losing existing alternatives. The results indicated that: when the probability is median, there is no difference between the high and low TU groups in choosing the deferred choice in a risk condition, prefer select decision. The results of two experiments suggested that TU can influence choice deferral and the influence was moderated by the delay risk and the level of probability.The results of these experiments showed that TU can influence decision preferences and the influence is context-dependent. It also showed that TU is a common factor in decision making under ambiguity and risk, intertemporal choice, and choice deferral, which support the existence of a stable dispositional trait to reduce uncertainty in decision making. So the present study not only helpful for us to know more about the behavioral consequences of TU, but also enhanced the individual differences research in decision making. Implications of these results and directions for future research are discussed. |
PDF Full Text Request