Conviction Narrative Theory: A theory of choice under radical uncertainty

被引:30
作者
Johnson, Samuel G. B. [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Bilovich, Avri [2 ]
Tuckett, David [2 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Warwick, Dept Psychol, Coventry CV4 7AL, England
[2] UCL, Ctr Study Decis Making Uncertainty, London W1CE 6BT, England
[3] Univ Bath, Sch Management, Bath BA2 7AY, England
[4] Univ Waterloo, Dept Psychol, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada
[5] Univ Oxford, Blavatnik Sch Govt, Oxford OX2 6GG, England
基金
英国工程与自然科学研究理事会;
关键词
behavioral economics; causal thinking; cognitive science; decision-making; emotion; explanations; imagination; narratives; reasoning; social learning; uncertainty; MENTAL TIME-TRAVEL; DECISION-MAKING; PHANTASTIC OBJECTS; COGNITIVE SCIENCE; CAUSAL NETWORKS; MODEL; EXPLANATION; MEMORY; RISK; CONSEQUENCES;
D O I
10.1017/S0140525X22001157
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Conviction Narrative Theory (CNT) is a theory of choice under radical uncertainty - situations where outcomes cannot be enumerated and probabilities cannot be assigned. Whereas most theories of choice assume that people rely on (potentially biased) probabilistic judgments, such theories cannot account for adaptive decision-making when probabilities cannot be assigned. CNT proposes that people use narratives - structured representations of causal, temporal, analogical, and valence relationships - rather than probabilities, as the currency of thought that unifies our sense-making and decision-making faculties. According to CNT, narratives arise from the interplay between individual cognition and the social environment, with reasoners adopting a narrative that feels "right" to explain the available data; using that narrative to imagine plausible futures; and affectively evaluating those imagined futures to make a choice. Evidence from many areas of the cognitive, behavioral, and social sciences supports this basic model, including lab experiments, interview studies, and econometric analyses. We identify 12 propositions to explain how the mental representations (narratives) interact with four inter-related processes (explanation, simulation, affective evaluation, and communication), examining the theoretical and empirical basis for each. We conclude by discussing how CNT can provide a common vocabulary for researchers studying everyday choices across areas of the decision sciences.
引用
收藏
页数:74
相关论文
共 305 条
[51]  
Chwe MichaelSuk-Young., 2001, Rational Ritual: Culture, Coordination, and Common Knowledge
[52]   The inherence heuristic across development: Systematic differences between children's and adults' explanations for everyday facts [J].
Cimpian, Andrei ;
Steinberg, Olivia D. .
COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2014, 75 :130-154
[53]  
Connolly Terry., 2000, JUDGMENT DECISION MA, V2nd
[54]   Rationalization is rational [J].
Cushman, Fiery ;
Altay, Sacha ;
Mercier, Hugo .
BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, 2020, 43
[55]   SPECULATIVE DYNAMICS [J].
CUTLER, DM ;
POTERBA, JM ;
SUMMERS, LH .
REVIEW OF ECONOMIC STUDIES, 1991, 58 (03) :529-546
[56]  
Damasio Antonio R., 1994, DESCARTESERROR
[57]  
Dawkins R., 2016, The Selfish Gene
[58]  
Dawson C., 2021, DREAD AVERSION EC PR
[59]   Optimality bias in moral judgment [J].
De Freitas, Julian ;
Johnson, Samuel G. B. .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2018, 79 :149-163
[60]   What works best: Objective statistics or a personal testimonial? An assessment of the persuasive effects of different types of message evidence on risk perception [J].
de Wit, John B. F. ;
Das, Enny ;
Vet, Raymond .
HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY, 2008, 27 (01) :110-115