臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：會計資訊之架構效應與模糊效應
書刊名：管理學報
作者：顏信輝 引用關係／陳慧玲 引用關係
作者(外文)：Yen, Sin-hui／Chen, Hui-ling
出版日期：2013
卷期：30:5
頁次：頁407-427
主題關鍵詞：架構效應；模糊效應；確定決策；風險偏好；會計資訊；Framing effect；Ambiguity effect；Uncertain decision；Risk preference；Accounting information
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(1) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:9
行為科學研究發現，相同經濟意義之資訊若採不同之陳述方式，可能系統性的影響決策者之風險偏好態度。此外，人們在不確定性環境下的決策行為，常基於依賴對事件發生可能性的信念進行判斷。故本研究整合兩項人類處理資訊之認知特性（架構效應與模糊效應），探討其對決策風險偏好之影響及可能之交互作用。本研究設計兩個不確定性決策問題個案，並透過2×3之受試者間實驗方法操弄兩項自變數「資訊陳述（區分正面陳述資訊與負面陳述資訊兩個處理水準）」與「資訊模糊性（區分精確資訊、點模糊資訊與區間模糊資訊三個處理水準）」，以檢測資訊架構與模糊性如何影響決策者在面臨不確定決策下之風險偏好。根據國內某私立大學137位會計系大學部高年級學生與碩士研究生之有效樣本分析，實證結果發現，架構效應在兩個決策個案中都發現符合預期：決策方案後果採負面陳述較採正面陳述時，使決策者形成更高程度之風險追求。然而，模糊效應在兩個案中則有不同之發現。最後，本研究發現資訊陳述方式（架構）及資訊模糊程度（模糊性）對決策風險偏好有顯著交互作用。
Behavioral science studies show that, alternative methods of stating information containing the same economic implications can systematically affect a decision maker's risk preference. Furthermore, in uncertain environments, people generally make decisions based on their beliefs about the likelihood of a certain event occurring. Therefore, this study integrates two cognitive characteristics of human information processing (the framing effect and the ambiguity effect) and explores the effects of these characteristics on decision risk preference and potential interaction. A 2 x 3 between-subject experiment was designed in this study to measure uncertain decisions in accounting information. The two independent variables ”information statement” (positive and negative statements) and the ”information ambiguity” (precise, point ambiguity, interval ambiguity) were tested using experimental methods to determine how they affected risk preference in decision makers (risk aversion or risk seeking). In this study, we analyzed 137 effective samples from senior-year university students and master's students in the department of accounting at a private university in Taiwan. Empirical results indicated that, in the overall sample, the framing effect fulfilled predicted outcomes for 2 accounting information decision cases. Negative statements about the consequences of a decision plan induced higher levels of risk seeking than positive statements concerning the same plan. However, the ambiguity effect caused different results in the 2 cases. In conclusion, we discovered that the framing effect (method of stating information) and the ambiguity effect (level of ambiguity of information) have a significant interactive effect on risk preference in decision making.
期刊論文
1.Bateman, C. R.、Fraedrich, J. P.、Iyer, R.(2002)。Framing Effects within the Ethical Decision Making Process of Consumers。Journal of Business Ethics，36(1/2)，119-140。  new window
2.Beaver, W. H.(1991)。Problems and Paradoxes in the Financial Reporting of Future Events。Accounting Horizons，5(4)，122-134。  new window
3.Bemasconi, M.、Loomes, G.(1992)。Failures of the Reduction Principle in an Ellsberg-type Problem。Theory and Decision，32(1)，77-100。  new window
4.Bier, V. M.、Connell, B. L.(1994)。Ambiguity Seeking in Multi-attribute Decisions: Effects of Optimism and Message Framing。Journal of Behavioral Decision Making，7(3)，169-182。  new window
5.Chow, C. C.、Sarin, R. K.(2001)。Comparative Ignorance and the Ellsberg Paradox。Journal of Risk and Uncertainty，22(2)，129-139。  new window
6.Dhar, S. K.、Gonzalez-Vallejo, C.、Soman, D.(1995)。Brand Promotions as a Lottery。Marketing Letters，6(3)，221-233。  new window
7.Di Mauro, Carmela、Maffioletti, Anna(1996)。An Experimental Investigation of the Impact of Ambiguity on the Valuation of Self-insurance and Self-protection。Journal of Risk and Uncertainty，13，53-71。  new window
8.Du, N.、Budescu, D.(2005)。The Effects of Imprecise Probabilities and Outcomes in Evaluating Investment Options。Management Science，51(12)，1791-1803。  new window
9.Emby, C.(1994)。Framing and Presentation Mode Effects in Professional Judgment: Auditors' Internal Control Judgments and Substantive Testing Decisions。Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory，13(1)，102-115。  new window
10.Kuhn, K. M.(1997)。Communicating Uncertainty: Framing Effects on Responses to Vague Probabilities。Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes，71(1)，55-83。  new window
11.Nelson, M. W.、Kinney, W. R.(1997)。The Effect of Ambiguity on Auditors Loss Contingency Reporting Judgments。The Accounting Review，72(2)，257-274。  new window
12.Richard, B.(2003)。The Interactive Effect of Message Framing, Presentation Order, and Source Credibility on Recruitment Practices。International Journal of Management，20(2)，156-163。  new window
13.Sawers, K.、Wright, A.、Zamora, V.(2011)。Does Greater Risk-bearing in Stock Option Compensation Reduce the Influence of Problem Framing on Managerial Risk-taking Behavior?。Behavioral Research in Accounting，23(1)，185-201。  new window
14.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(5/6)，565-576。  new window
15.Weber, E. U.、Hilton, D. J.(1990)。Contextual Effects in the Interpretations of Probability Words: Perceived Base Rate and Severity of Events。Journal of experimental psychology: Human perception and performance，16(4)，781-789。  new window
16.Zebda, A.(2011)。A General Framework for Accounting and Audit Decision Making under Ambiguity。International Journal of Business, Accounting, and Finance，5(2)，1-30。  new window
17.Frisch, Deborah、Baron, Jonathan(1988)。Ambiguity and rationality。Journal of Behavioral Decision Making，1，149-157。  new window
18.Fox, C. R.、Tversky, A.(1995)。Ambiguity Aversion and Comparative Ignorance。Quarterly Journal of Economics，110(3)，585-603。  new window
19.Asare, S.(1992)。The Auditor's Going-Concern Decision: Interaction of Task Variables and the Sequential Processing of Evidence。The Accounting Review，67(2)，379-393。  new window
20.Camerer, C.、Weber, M.(1992)。Recent Developments in Modeling Preferences: Uncertainty and Ambiguity。Journal of Risk and Uncertainty，5(4)，325-370。  new window
21.Emby, C.、Finely, D.(1997)。Debiasing Framing Effects in Auditors' Internal Control Judgments and Testing Decisions。Contemporary Accounting Research，14(2)，55-77。  new window
22.Highhouse, S.(1994)。A Verbal Protocol Analysis of Choice under Ambiguity。Journal of Economic Psychology，15(4)，621-635。  new window
23.Liyanarachchi, G. A.(2007)。Feasibility of Using Student Subjects in Accounting Experiments: A Review。Pacific Accounting Review，19(1)，47-67。  new window
24.Levin, Irwin P.、Schneider, Sandra L.、Gaeth, Gary J.(1998)。All Frames Are Not Created Equal: A Typology And Critical Analysis of Framing Effects。Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes，76(2)，149-188。  new window
25.Ashton, R. H.、Kramer, S. L.(1980)。Students as surrogates in behavioral accounting research: Some evidence。Journal of Accounting Research，18(1)，1-15。  new window
26.Ellsberg, Daniel(1961)。Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms。The Quarterly Journal of Economics，75(4)，643-669。  new window
27.Tversky, A.、Kahnema, D.(1974)。Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristic and Biases。Science，185(4157)，1124-1131。  new window
28.Frisch, Deborah(1993)。Reasons for Framing Effects。Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes，54(3)，399-429。  new window
29.Tversky, Amos、Kahneman, Daniel(1981)。The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice。Science，211(4481)，453-458。  new window
30.Hogarth, Robin M.、Einhorn, Hillel J.(1990)。Venture Theory: A Model of Decision Weights。Management Science，36(7)，780-803。  new window
31.Einhorn, H. J.、Hogarth, R. M.(1986)。Decision Making under Ambiguity。The Journal of Business，59(4)，225-250。  new window
32.Amer, Tarek、Hackenbrack, Karl、Nelson, Mark(1994)。Between-Auditor Differences in the Interpretation of Probability Phrases。Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory，13(1)，126-136。  new window
33.Harrison, Kenneth E.、Tomassini, Lawrence A.(1989)。Judging the Probability of a Contingent Loss: An Empirical Study。Contemporaary Accounting Research，5(2)，642-648。  new window
34.Laswad, Fawzi、Mak, Yuen Teen(1997)。Interpretations of Probability Expressions by New Zealand Standard Setters。Accounting Horizons，11(4)，16-23。  new window
35.Reimers, Jane L.(1992)。Additional Evidence on the Need for Disclosure Reform。Accounting Horizons，6(1)，36-41。  new window
會議論文
1.王翰屏(2002)。從機率詞彙的雙向性分析用詞彙溝通機率對審計判斷的影響。第三屆管理學域學術研討會，(會議日期: 2002/05/07)。台中。  延伸查詢new window
2.王翰屏、簡俱揚(2007)。審計人員與財報使用者對機率詞彙的解釋。2007會計理論與實務研討會，(會議日期: 2007/11/08-11/09)。台北大學。  延伸查詢new window
3.劉信賢、林吉祥、丁禹滋、蔡孝棕(2009)。任務型式與模糊性避免。2009科技與管理研討會，台灣科技大學 (會議日期: 2009/11/06)。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.杜榮瑞(2005)。機率詞業與審計判斷：實驗研究。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.王翰屏(1999)。以詞彙溝通機率對審計決策的影響(博士論文)。國立臺灣大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.洪肇鍇(2003)。對責任語彙認知之研究(碩士論文)。國立政治大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.Frisch, D.、Baron, J.(1994)。Ambiguous Probabilities and the Paradoxes of Expected Utility。Subjective Probability。Chichester, U.K.：Wiley。  new window
2.Simon, H. A.(1957)。A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice。Models of Man。New York：John Wiley。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：476（臺灣：462，外國：14） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2344557 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：68147633
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上