Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The person–situation debate in personality psychology refers to the controversy concerning whether the person or the situation is more influential in determining a person's behavior. Personality trait psychologists believe that a person's personality is relatively consistent across situations. [ 1 ]
Most theoretical analyses of risky choices depict each option as a gamble that can yield various outcomes with different probabilities. [2] Widely accepted risk-aversion theories, including Expected Utility Theory (EUT) and Prospect Theory (PT), arrive at risk aversion only indirectly, as a side effect of how outcomes are valued or how probabilities are judged. [3]
Repeated questions make people think their first answer was wrong, lead them to change their answer, or cause people to keep answering until the interrogator gets the exact response that they desire. Elizabeth Loftus states that errors in answers are dramatically reduced if a question is only asked once.
It is often argued that open-ended questions (i.e. questions that elicit more than a yes/no answers) are preferable because they open up discussion and enquiry. Peter Worley argues that this is a false assumption. This is based on Worley's central arguments that there are two different kinds of open and closed questions: grammatical and conceptual.
For example, it is possible for a person to experience automatic thought processes, and for those processes occur without that person's intention or awareness of their occurrence. [6] In terms of impression formation, this means that an observer may perceive another person's behavior and automatically make trait inferences from that behavior ...
The most common explanation of the Allais paradox is that individuals prefer certainty over a risky outcome even if this defies the expected utility axiom. The certainty effect was popularised by Kahneman and Tversky (1979), and further discussed in Wakker (2010). [6] The certainty effect highlights the appeal of a zero-variance lottery.
Creative ability was measured in a study using convergent tasks, which require a single correct answer, and divergent tasks, which requires producing many different answers of varying correctness. Two types of convergent tasks used were, the first being a remote associates tasks, which gave the subject three words and asked what word the ...
One group of people were given only two seconds to answer the questions; whereas the other group of people were allowed to use as much time as they would like to answer the questions. The result obtained was that a higher percentage of incorrect answers were found in the time pressured group than the other; they concluded that this was a result ...