Efekat vremenske i socijalne distance na odlučivanje

Abstract

Istraživanja pokazuju da se saveti često razlikuju od odluka za sebe, kao i da se odluke za sebe razlikuju u zavisnosti od toga koliko je vremenski udaljen njihov ishod. Prvi fenomen izučava se kao efekat socijalne distance, a drugi kao efekat vremenske distance na odlučivanje. Neki modeli prepoznaju sličnosti u efektima vremenske i socijalne distance na odlučivanje, ali za to nude parcijalna objašnjenja: preko uključenosti afekata, čiji se značaj zanemaruje sa povećanjem distance ili uključenosti društvenih vrednosti čiji se značaj povećava sa povećanjem distance. Prema teoriji nivoa konstrukcije (engl. Construal level theory, CLT) u osnovi efekta distance na odlučivanje je kognitivni mehanizam nezavisan od uključenosti afekata, socijalnih vrednosti i bilo kojh drugih sadržaja u situaciji odlučivanja: na maloj distanci mentalne reprezentacije (konstrukcije) su konkretne, bogate perifernim detaljima i odnose se na izvodljivost cilja (konstrukcije nižeg nivoa); na velikoj distanci reprezentacije su apstraktne, sa manjim brojem centralnih karakteristika i odnose se na poželjnost cilja (konstrukcije višeg nivoa). Pošavši od ovih pretpostavki osmislili smo studiju od četiri konceptualno povezana ogleda u kojima smo ispitivali: a. da li vremenska i socijalna distanca imaju efekta na odlučivanje (izbor i dopadljivost opcija); b. da li ima sličnosti između efekata vremenske i socijalne distance na odlučivanje; c. da li se dosledno potvrđuju pretpostavke CLT o nivou konstrukcija u osnovi efekata vremenske i socijalne distance na odlučivanje bez obzira na sadržaj/tip konstrukcija višeg nivoa (u kojoj meri su povezane sa društvenim vrednostima) i sadržaj/tip konstrukcija nižeg nivoa (u kojoj meri okolnosti za izvođenje cilja uključuju afekte). Takođe, uporedili smo uloženi kognitivni napor (procenu teškoće odlučivanja i vreme potrebno za donošenje odluke) na različitim nivoima distance, pošto se prema CLT razlike ne očekuju, dok drugi modeli predviđaju razlike u različitom smeru (ulaganje više/manje napora sa povećanjem distance). U pripremnoj fazi testiranja stimulus materijala učestvovalo je 186, a u glavnoj studiji 436 studenata Univerziteta u Beogradu, slučajno raspoređenih u grupe prema nivoima vremenske (Ogledi od 1 do 4) ili socijalne distance (Ogledi 1 i 4). Ispitanicima su prezentovane situacije izbora aktivnosti na fakultetu, a variran je tip konstrukcija nižeg nivoa (afektivne/afektivno neutralne prepreke) i tip konstrukcija višeg nivoa (individualni/društveni ciljevi). Ponuđene opcije su bile opisane tako da imaju suprotstavljene prednosti/slabosti na teškoći izvodljivosti i poželjnosti cilja. Da bi se ispitalo da li je efekat distance na odlučivanje osetljiv na operacionalizaciju zavisne varijable, ispitanici su birali između dve ponuđene opcije (Ogledi 1, 2 i 3) i/ili su ocenjivali koliko im se dopada svaka od njih (Ogledi 1 i 4), odnosno u kojoj meri su spremni da zamene odabranu opciju (Ogled 2). Rezultati su pokazali da se efekti vremenske i socijalne distance na odlučivanje u velikoj meri razlikuju. Efekat vremenske distance na izbor opcija nije se ispoljio i pored različitih operacionalizacija izbora, manipulacija distancom i primene različitog stimulus materijala; spremnost na promenu odabrane opcije ukazuje na to da sa povećanjem vremenske distance opada značaj i poželjnosti i teškoće izvodljivosti ciljeva; efekat na dopadljivost opcija nezavisno od izbora ispoljio se tako što se dopadljivost manje poželjnog lakše izvodljivog cilja smanjivala sa povećanjem distance, dok se dopadljivost druge opcije nije menjala. Za razliku od efekata vremenske distance, socijalna distanca imala je efekat na izbor opcija: poželjniji, teže izvodljiv cilj češće je savetovan drugima nego biran za sebe, bez značajne interakcije sa tipom situacije, ali statistički značajno u dva od četiri tipa situacije; odabrane opcije uvek su bile dopadljivije kao savet nego kao izbor za sebe; efekat socijalne distance na dopadljivost opcija nezavisno od izbora ispoljio se tako što je na većoj distanci bila veća dopadljivost poželjnijeg teže izvodljivog cilja, ali samo kada su konstrukcije nižeg nivoa bile afektivne. Jedine jasne sličnosti efekata vremenske i socijalne distance na odlučivanje ispoljile su se na meri relativne dopadljivosti (razlika dopadljivosti poželjnijeg teže izvodljivog i manje poželjnog lakše izvodljivog cilja) – bila je pozitivnija na velikoj distanci. Konačno, nije bilo razlika u uloženom kognitivnom naporu, operacionalizovanom preko procene teškoće odlučivanja i vremena potrebnog za donošenje odluke, u zavisnosti od vremenske i socijalne distance. Rezultati su diskutovani s obzirom na pretpostavke CLT i modela koji efekte distance na odlučivanje objašnjavaju ulogom afekata ili ulogom socijalnih vrednosti. Razmotren je i problem operacionalizacije ključnih varijabli i moguće implikacije na zaključivanje o psihološkim mehanizmima u osnovi efekta distance na odlučivanje.

Giving advice to others often differs from deciding for oneself. Somewhat surprisingly, current decisions for oneself differ from future decisions for oneself in the similar manner. There is extensive evidence for both phenomena, known as the effect of social and temporal distance on decision-making. Some theoretical models offer partial explanations for these effects. For example, when affect is involved in the decisionmaking process, its role will decrease as the distance is larger (e.g. when advising others or deciding for future self; Loewenstein, 1996); when the desirable choice option conforms with social values, their role will increase as the distance is larger (Stone, Choi, Bruine deBrui& Mandel, 2013). In contrast, the Construal Level Theory (CLT; Trope & Liberman, 2003; 2010) proposes an underlying universal cognitive mechanism that accounts for the effects of distance on decision-making regardless of involvement of affect, social values or any other psychological aspects of the decision-making situation. If the psychological distance is small, mental representations (construals) are concrete and rich with peripheral details mostly about the feasibility of a goal (low-level construal, LC); if the psychological distance is large, mental representations are abstract, containing few central aspects of the decision-making situation and are mostly about the desirability of a goal (high-level construal, HC). We designed a study of four conceptually linked experiments to examine: a. whether temporal distance and social distance have the expected effects on decisionmaking (choice / liking of chosen option / liking of options independent of choice) so that the desirability of a goal would increase while its feasibility would decrease as the distance increased; b. whether there are systematic similarities between temporal distance and social distance effects on decision-making; c. whether the CLT propositions about the role of construal level in explaining the effect of distance on decision-making is replicated consistently regardless of the content/type of HC (if it involves personal value, e.g. interest in course topic, or social values, e.g. social importance of an humanitarian project) and regardless of the content/type of LC (if it is affect-laden, e.g. taste of the food that has to be consumed as a part of the course study, or it is more affect-neutral, e.g. convenience of the location of the project). Additionally, we aimed to compare cognitive effort (measured by estimation of the difficulty of decision-making and time needed for decision-making) on different distance levels. The CLT would not expect differences, whereas there are models predicting that larger distance would lead to investment of more cognitive effort and conversely, other models predicting the opposite i.e. less cognitive effort. A total of 186 Belgrade University students took part in the preliminary stimulus testing, and 436 in the main phase. They were randomized to groups with low/high temporal-distance levels (Experiments 1–4) or low/high social-distance levels (Experiments 1 and 4). They were presented with choice situations designed to be plausible for students. The type of LC (affect-laden or affect-neutral) and the type of HC (personal or social goals) were within-subject factors. To explore whether the effect of distance on decision-making is sensitive to the operationalization of dependent variables, we asked participants to choose between two options (Experiments 1, 2, and 3) and/or estimate how much they liked each of them (Experiments 1 and 4) and/or how much they were ready to replace the chosen option (Experiment 2). Results showed that temporal-distance effects and social-distance effects on decision-making are more different than similar. The increase of temporal distance did not have an effect on choice despite the variety of: a. operationalization of choice (categorical/continual variable), b. distance manipulation (imaginative/simulation of real choice), and c. difference in likeability of the options (more or less emphasized differences between the types of HC, and more or less emphasized differences between the types of LC). Readiness to replace the chosen option indicated that both LC and HC were perceived less important as temporal distance increased. When evaluated independent of choice, liking options with better LC decreased as the distance was larger while there was no effect of temporal distance on liking the options with better HC. In contrast, social distance had the expected effect on choice: the more desirable / less achievable goal was more often advised to others than chosen for oneself – the size of this effect was the largest in situations with affect-laden LC/HC social goal and affect-neutral LC/HC personal goal; chosen options were always more liked as an advice rather than as a choice for oneself; effect of social distance on liking options independent of choice was registered only when LC were affect-laden. The only clear similarity between temporal and social distance effects on decision making was registered on a relative liking measure (i.e. difference in liking option with better HC compared to liking option with better LC): relative liking of options with better HC increased as the distance was larger. The cognitive effort did not differ with an increase in temporal nor increase in social distance. The results are discussed related to predictions of the CLT and other competing models predicting the effects of specific attributes (affect or social values). We also addressed the differences that emerged as consequences of different types of operationalization of dependent variables, which are usually overlooked in experimental designs. In concluding, we discussed potential practical implications of the results in public communication, health, advertising, etc. We explored limitations of this study and suggested directions for future research.