會計資訊之架構效應--決策類型,心理機制與除誤方法__臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

:::

詳目顯示

第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆

/1頁

論文基本資料
摘要
外文摘要
參考文獻

題名：	會計資訊之架構效應--決策類型,心理機制與除誤方法
作者：	顏信輝
作者(外文)：	Yen, Sin-Hui
校院名稱：	國立臺灣大學
系所名稱：	會計學研究所
指導教授：	杜榮瑞連韻文
學位類別：	博士
出版日期：	1999
主題關鍵詞：	架構效應；除誤方法；展望理論；機率性心智模型；模糊過程理論；聯結論模型；後果顯著效應；反應模式；framing effect；debiasing method；prospect theory；probabilistic mental model；fuzzy-trace theory；associative model；outcome salience effect；response mode
原始連結：	連回原系統網址
相關次數：	被引用次數:期刊(1) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0) 排除自我引用:0 共同引用:0 點閱:60

"架構效應"（framing effect）係指人們之選擇行為，會受到因對問題所作之不同陳述或框架方式之誘導，產生有系統之偏好改變現象。根據對會計及審計文獻所作之回顧，顯示過去研究所發現之不同架構效應現象，可以歸因於各研究所採用之決策類型（多種方案選擇決策或特定標的信念決策）不同所致。本論文除了由不同決策類型出發，以區別不同種類之架構效應外，也分析並比較產生不同決策類型架構效應之可能心理歷程。基於對產生架構效應之心理機制的實證發現，本論文進一步提出並測試在不同決策類型下，相關架構效應之除誤方法。
針對多種方案選擇決策之架構效應，本論文以大學生及來自不同產業之經理人員為受試者，進行四個實驗。此四個實驗分別採企業經營之資本預算決策，及個人財產決策為題材，設計相關之實驗材料。研究結果發現在企業經營與私人財產決策下，不同經驗之受試者均呈現如Tversky與Kahneman（1981）提出之架構效應：利得陳述誘導受試者規避風險，損失陳述則誘導受試者追求風險。然而，對企業經營決策而言，受試者呈現風險態度逆轉之雙向性架構效應；對個人財產決策而言，受試者呈現風險態度改變（但不逆轉）之規避風險單向性架構效應。本論文進一步測試三個心理學理論（展望理論、機率性心智模型與模糊過程理論），對此決策類型架構效應之解釋力，實驗發現以機率性心智模型最具解釋能力。根據機率性心智模型之精神所設計的完整資訊，亦能有效緩和架構效應。
針對特定標的信念決策之架構效應，本論文亦以大學生與企業經理人員為受試者，進行三個實驗，實驗題材為企業經營之資本預算決策。實驗結果指出受試者呈現風險態度改變之追求風險單向性架構效應。在三個可能之心理學解釋理論（展望理論、聯結論模型與後與後果顯著效應）中，本論文發現以聯結論模型對此決策類型之架構效應最具解釋能力。根據聯結論模型精神所設計之完整資訊，與根據標準表徵觀念所提出之資訊格式，均可有效緩和此類型決策之架構效應。
最後，本論文之七個實驗結果指出，經驗與反應模式（選擇或評估/判斷）均不致重大影響架構效應發現。此外，受試者之決策信心程度，亦不受資訊陳述方式之影響。

以文找文

A review of accounting and auditing literature suggests that the differential framing effects in prior research may be attributed to the fact that different decision types (i.e., choices between two alternatives vs. preference on a specific target) were utilized in various studies. In addition to distinguishing the framing effects from one decision type to another, this dissertation investigates various theories of the psychological processes underlying these framing effects. This dissertation further proposes and tests the debiasing methods corresponding to the framing effects of different decision types.
Four experiments, using undergraduate students and senior managers in various industries, were conducted to examine the framing effect of the "choice" decision type. Two scenarios involving business capital budgeting and personal money decisions were developed as experimental material. Consistent with Tversky and Kahneman''s (1981) finding, framing effects existed across different subjects and scenarios. However, subjects exhibited a bidirectional framing effect for business capital budgeting decisions while they exhibited a unidirectional framing effect for personal money decisions. Further, among the three theories (i.e., prospect theory, fuzzy-trace theory, and probabilistic mental model), the probabilistic mental model (PMM) explained the observed behavior best. The validity of PMM was further examined by providing subjects with "complete" information. The results indicated that no framing effects emerged when complete information was offered.
Three additional experiments with undergraduates and senior managers as subjects were conducted to investigate framing effects of the "preference" decision type. The experimental material involved business capital budgeting only. The results indicated that unidirectional framing effects existed. Among the three theories (i.e., prospect theory, associative model, and the outcome salience effect), the associative model explained the observed behavior best. Providing subjects with either complete information or standard representation was found to mitigate framing effects. This further confirmed the descriptive validity of the associative model.
Finally, in the above seven experiments, experience and response mode（choice vs. rating/judgment） were found to have no significant impact on framing effects.

以文找文

中文部份：
工商時報 (民八十八年二月三日). 運用企業審計，財務會計風暴靠邊站. 第29版.
周齊武，吳安妮 (民八十七). 將經理人員資訊交換程序納入管會課程之教學材料. 會計研究月刊，第157期，頁59-67.
周齊武，劉俊儒 (民八十六). 擴張投入的誘因及趨避之道. 會計研究月刊，第135期，頁122-130.
周齊武，吳安妮，Awasthi., V. (民八十七). 臺灣經理人員對資源分配決策下之「不當堅持」的認知及經驗. 會計研究月刊，第151期，頁40-47.
孫碧月 (民八十七). 經驗、架構方式對審計決策之影響. 國立臺灣大學會計學研究所未發表碩士論文.
顧慧貞 (民八十六). 獎酬制度、自我選擇與框架方式對績效之影響. 國立臺灣大學會計學研究所未發表碩士論文.
英文部份：
Accounting Principles Boards, AICPA (1970). Basic concepts and accounting principles underlying financial statements of business enterprises. APB Statement No. 4, 40.
Asare, S.K. (1992). The auditor''s going-concern decision: Interaction of task variables and the sequential processing of evidence. The Accounting Review, 67, 379-393.
Ashton, A.H., & Ashton, R.H. (1988). Sequential belief revision in auditing. The Accounting Review, 63, 623-641.
Ashton, A.H., & Ashton, R.H. (1990). Evidence-responsiveness in professional judgment: Effects of positive versus negative evidence and presentation mode. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 46, 1-19.
Ayers, S. & Kaplan, S.E. (1993). An examination of the effect of hypothesis framing on auditors'' information choices in an analytical procedure task. ABACUS, 29, 113-129.
Bailey, A.D., Main, D., & Murdock, R.J. (1988). The effects of framing and ordering of information on auditor judgment. Working Paper, Peat Marwick Foundation Research Opportunities in Auditing.
Barton, S.L., Duchon, D. D., & Dunegan, K.J. (1989). An empirical test of Staw amd Ross''s prescriptions for the management of escalation of commitment behavior in organizations. Decision Sciences, 532-544.
Bazerman, M.H. (1984). The relevance of Kahneman and Tversky''s concept of framing to organizational behavior. Journal of Management, 10, 333-343.
Bedard, J. (1994). Discussion of framing and presentation mode effects in professional judgment: Auditors'' internal control judgments and substantive testing decisions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 13, 119-123.
Bedard, J., & Graham,Jr., L. (1994). Auditors'' knowledge organization: Observations from audit practice and their implications. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 13, 73-83.
Bohm, P., & Lind, H. (1992). A note on the robustness of a classical framing result. Journal of Economic Psychology, 13, 355-361.
Boritz, J. E. (1997). Discussion of "Debiasing framing effects in auditors'' internal control judgment and testing decisions", Contemporary Accounting Research, 14, 79-88.
Brockner, J. (1992). The escalation of commitment to a failing course of action: Toward theoretical progress, Academy of Management Review, 17, 39-61.
Bruns, W.Jr., & McKinnon, S. (1993). Information and managers: A field study. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 5, 84-108.
Chang, O. (1984). Tax avoidance: A prospect theory perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation（University of Illinois）.
Chang, O.H., Nichols, D.R., & Schultz, J.J. (1987). Taxpayer attitudes toward tax audit risk. Journal of Economic Psychology, 8, 299-309.
Chang, O.H., & Schultz,Jr. J.J. (1990). The income tax withholding phenomenon: Evidence from TCMP data. The Journal of the American Taxation Association, Fall, 88-93.
Chow, C.W., Harrison, P., Lindquist, T., & Wu, A. (1997). Escalating commitment to unprofitable projects: Replication and cross-cultural extension. Management Accounting Research, 8, 347-361.
Committee to Prepare a Statement of Basic Accounting Theory, AAA (1966). A Statement of Basic Accounting Theory, 1. new window

Clotfelter, C. (1983). Tax evasion and tax rates: An analysis of individual returns. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 65, 363-373.
Dillard, J.F., Kauffman, N.L., & spires, E.E. (1991). Evidence order and belief revision in management accounting decisions. Accounting , organizations and Soeiety, 16, 619-633.
Duchon, D., Dunegan, K.J., & Barton, S.L. (1989). Framing the problem and making decisions: The facts are not enough. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 36, 25-27.
Duncan, W.A., LaRue, D., & Reckers, P.M.J. (1989). An empirical examination of the influence of selected economic and noneconomic variables on decision making by tax professionals. Advances in Taxation, 2, 91-106.
Dunegan, K.J. (1993). Framing, cognitive modes, and image theory: Toward an understanding of a glass half full. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 491-503.
Emby, C. (1994). Framing and presentation mode effects in professional judgment: Auditors'' internal control judgments and substantive testing decisions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 13, 102-115.
Emby, C., & Finley, D. (1997). Debiasing framing effects in auditors'' internal control judgments and testing decisions. Contemporary Accounting Research, 14, 55-77.
Fagley, N.S., & Miller, P.M. (1990). The effect of framing on choice; Interactions with risk-taking propensity, cognitive style, and sex. Personality an Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 496-510.
Fischhoff, B. (1983). Predicting frames. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 103-116.
Frisch, D. (1993). Reasons for framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 399-429.
Garrison, R.H., & Noreen, E.W. (1997). Managerial Accounting, eighth edition, The McGraw-Hill comapnies, Inc.
Gibbins, M., & Jamal, K. (1993). Problem-centered research and knowledge-based theory in the professional accounting setting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 18, 451-466.
Gigerenzer, G., Hoffrage, U., & Kleinbolting, H. (1991). Probabilistic mental models: A brunswikian theory of confidence. Psychological Review, 98, 506-528.
Guyatt, G.H., Cook, D.J., King, D., Norman, G.R., Kane, S.C. & van Ineveld, C. (1999). Effect of the framing of questionnaire items regarding satisfaction with training on residents'' responses. Academic Medicine, 74, 192-194.
Highhouse, S., & Paese, P.W. (1996). Problem domain and prospect frame: choice under opportunity versus threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 124-132.
Hilton, R.W. (1997). Managerial Accounting, third edition, The McGraw-Hill companies, Inc.
Hite, P., Jackson, B., & Spicer, M. (1988). The effect of framing biases on taxpayer compliance. Unpublished manuscript(University of Colorado-Boulder).
Hogarth, R.M., & Einhorn, H.J. (1992). Order effects in belief updating: the belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 1-55.
Horngren, C.T., Foster, G., & Datar, S.M. (1997). Cost Acconunting: A Managerial Emphasis, ninth edition, Prentice Hall.
Jackson, B., & Milliron, V. (1986). Tax compliance research, findings, problems, and prospects. Journal of Accounting Literature, 5, 125-165.
Jamal, K., Johnson, P.E., & Berryman, R.G. (1995). Detecting framing effects in financial statements. Contemporary Accounting Research, 12, 85-105.
Johnson, P.E., Jamal, K.J., & Berryman, R.G. (1991). Effects of framing on auditor decision. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 75-105.
Jones, S.K., Frisch, D., Yurak, T.J., & Kim, E. (1998). Choices and opportunities: Another effect of framing on decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 11, 211-226.
Joyce, E.J., & Biddle, G.C. (1981). Anchoring and adjustment in probabilistic inference in auditing. Journal of Accounting Research, 19, 120-145.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341-350.
Kennedy, J. (1993). Debiasing audit judgment with accountability: A framework and experimental results. Journal of Accounting Research, Autumn, 231-245.
Kennedy, J. (1995). Debiasing the curse of knowledge in audit judgment. The Accounting Review, 70, 249-273.
Kessler, E.H., Ford, C.M., Bailey, J.R. (1996). Object valence as a moderator of the framing effect of risk preference. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 30, 241-256.
Koonce, L. (1992). Explanation and counter explanation during audit analytical review. The Accounting Review, Jan, 59-76.
Kida, T. (1984). The impact of hypothesis-testing strategies on auditors'' use of judgment data. Journal of Accounting Research, 22, 332-340.
Klayman, J., & Ha, Y. (1987). Confirmation, disconfirmation and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review, 96, 211-228.
Kuhberger, A. (1995). The framing of decisions: A new look at old problems. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62, 230-240.
Kuhberger, A. (1998). The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 23-55.
Levin, I.P. (1987). Associative effects of information framing. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 25, 85-86.
Levin, I.P., & Chapman, D.P. (1993). Risky decision making and allocation of resources for leukemia and AIDS program. Health Psychology, 12, 110-117.
Levin, I.P. & Gaeth, G.J. (1988). How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. Journal of Consumer Research, 15. 374-378.
Levin, I.P., Johnson, R.D., & Davis, M.L. (1987). How information frame influences risky decisions: Between-subjects and within-subject comparisons. Journal of Economic Psychology, 8, 43-54.
Levin, I.P., Johnson, R.D., Deldin, P.J., Carstens, L.M., Cressey, L.J., & Davis, C.R. (1986). Framing effects in decisions with completely and incompletely described alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38, 48-64.
Levin, I.P., Johnson, R.D., Russo, C.P., & Deldin, P.J. (1985). Framing effects in judgment tasks with varying amounts of information. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36, 362-377.
Levin, I.P., Schneider, S.L., & Gaeth, G.J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typoloy and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 149-188.
Levin, I.P., Schnittjer, S.K., & Thee, S.L. (1988). Information framing effects in social and personal decisions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 520-529.
Levin, I.P., Snyder, M.A., & Chapman, D.P. (1988). The interaction of experiential and situational factors and gender in a simulated risky decision-making task. The Journal of Psychology, 122, 173-181.
Libby, R. (1981). Accounting and Human Information Processing: Theory and Applications. Prentice-Hall, Inc.,: New Jersey.
Loke, W.H., & Lau, S.L.L. (1992). Effects of framing and mathematical experience on judgments. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 30, 393-395.
Loke, W.H., & Tan, K.F. (1992). Effects of framing and missing information in expert and novice judgment. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 30, 187-190.
Macdonald, R. R. (1986). Credible conceptions and implausible probabilities. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 39, 16-27.
Marteau, T.M. (1989). Framing of information: Its influence upon decisions of doctors and patients. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 89-94.
McMillan, J.J., & White, R.A. (1993). Auditors'' belief revisions and evidence search: The effect of hypothesis framd, confirmationbias, and professional skepticism. The Accounting Review, 68, 443-465.
Messier, W.F.,Jr. (1992). The sequencing of audit evidence: Its impact on the extent of audit testing and report formulation. Accounting and Business Research, 22, 143-150.
Messier, W.F.Jr., & Tubb, R.M. (1994). Recency effects in belief revisions: The impact of audit experience and the review process. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory. 13, 57-72.
Mowen, M.M., & Mowen, J.C. (1986). An empirical examination of the biasing effects of framing on business decisions. Decision Sciences, 7, 596-602.
Newbery, K.J., Reckers, M.J., & Wyndelts, R.W. (1993). An examination of tax practitioner decisions; The role of preparer sanctions and framing effects associated with client condition. Journal of Economic Psychology, 14, 439-452.
Newell, A., & Simon, H.A. (1973). Human Problem Solving. Prentice Hall.
Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1986). Opportunity costs and the framing of resource allocation decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 348-356.
O''Clock, P. & Devine, K. (1995). An investigation of framing and firm size on the auditor''s going concern decision. Accounting and Business Research, 25, 197-207.
Reyna, V.F., & Brainerd, C.J. (1991a). Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in choice: Gist extraction, Truncation, and conversion. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 4, 249-262.
Reyna, V.F., & Brainerd, C.J. (1991b). Fuzzy-trace theory and children''s acquisition of mathematical and scientific concepts. Learning and Individual Differences, 3, 27-59.
Robben, H.S.J., Webley, P, Weigel, R.H., Warneryd, K., Kinsey, K.A., Hessing, D.J., Alvira Martin, F., Elffers, H., Wahludn, R., Van Langenhove, L., Long, S.B., & Scholz, J.T. (1990). Decision frame and opportunity as determinants of tax cheating. Journal of Economic Psychology, 11, 341-364.
Roszkowski, M.J., & Snelbecker, G.E. (1990). Effects of "framing" on measures of risk: Financial planners are not immune. The Journal of Behavioral Economics, 19, 237-246.
Rutledge, R.W. (1995). The ability to moderate recency effects through framing of management accounting information. Journal of Managerial Issues, VII, 27-40.
Rutledge, R.W., & Harrell, A. (1993). Escalating commitment to an ongoing project: The effects of responsibility and framing of accounting information. International Journal of Management. 10, 300-313.
Rutledge, R.W., & Harrell, A. M. (1994). The impact of responsibility and framing of budgetary information on group-shift. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 6, 92-109.
Salminen, P., & Wallenius, J. (1993). Testing prospect theory in a deterministic multiple criteria decision-making. Decision Sciences, 24, 279-294.
Sanders, D.L., & Wyndelts, R.W. (1989). An examination of tax practioners'' decisions under uncertainty. Advances in Taxation, 2, 41-72.
Sanders, D., & Wong-on-Wing, B. (1987). Auditors'' decision making under uncertainty: An examination of selected framing effects. Working Paper presented to The Peat Marwick Foundation Research Opportunities in Auditing Program.
Schadewald, M.S. (1989). Reference point effects in taxpayer decision making. The Journal of the American Taxation Association, Spring, 68-84.
Schepanske, A., Kelsey, D. (1990). Testing for framing effects in taxpayer compliance decisions. The Journal of the American Taxation Association, Fall, 60-77.
Schepanski, A., & Shearer, T. (1995). A prospect theory account of the income tax withholding phenomenon. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63, 174-186.
Schneider, S. L. (1992). Framing and conflict: Aspiration level contingency, the status quo, and current theories of risky choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 1040-1057.
Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., Douglas, C. A., & Hetrick, C. T. (1994). Escalation of commitment and the framing effect: An empirical investigation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 509-528.
Shafir, E., Simonson, I., & Tversky, A. (1993). Reason-based choice. Cognition, 49, 11-36.
Sharp, D. J., & Salter, S. B. (1997). Project escalation and sunk costs: A test of the international generalizability of agency and prospect theories. Journal of International Business Studies, 28, 101-121.
Sonnemans, J., Schram, A., & Offerman, T. (1998). Public good provision and public bad prevention: The effect of framing. Journal of economic Behavior & Organization, 34, 143-161.
Staw, B. M. (1976). Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 16, 27-44.
Staw, B. M., & Ross, J. (1987). Knowing when to pull the plug. Harvard Business Review, 87. 68-74.
Trotman, K.T., & Sng, J. (1989). The effect of hypothesis framing, prior expectations and cue diagnosticity on auditors'' information choice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 14, 565-576.
Tubbs, R.M., Messier, Jr.W.F., & Knechel, W.R. (1990). Recency effects in the auditior''s belief rrevision process. The Accounting Review, 65, 452-460.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1984). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. Journal of Business, October, S252-S278.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.
van Schie, E.C.M. & van der Pligt, J. (1995). Influencing risk preference in decision making: The effects of framing and salience, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63, 264-275.
Wang, X.T. (1996). Framing effects: Dynamics and task domains. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 145-157.
Wang, X.T., & Johnston, V.S. (1995). Perceived social context and risk preference: A re-examination of framing effects in a life-death decision problem. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 8, 279-293.
Weigel, R.H., Hessing, D.J., & Elffers, H. (1987). Tax evasion research: A critical appraisal and theoretical model. Journal of Economics Psychology, 8, 215-235.
Whyte, G. (1986). Escalating commitment to a course of action: A reinterpretation. Academy of Management Review, 11, 311-321.
Wilson, D.K., Kaplan, R.M., & Schneiderman, L.J. (1987). Framing of decisions and selections of alternatives in health care. Social Behaviour, 2, 51-59.
Zickar, M. J., & Highhouse, S. (1998). Looking closer at the effects of framing on risky choice: An item response theory analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 75-91.

推文
推薦
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
轉寄

top

:::

相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱

1.	架構效應與順序效應對股票投資判斷之影響

無相關博士論文

無相關書籍

無相關著作

無相關點閱

QR Code

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

詳目顯示

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫