全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

工程领域的风险决策及认知机制研究
Research on Risk Decision-Making and Its Cognitive Mechanisms in the Engineering Field

DOI: 10.12677/me.2024.122024, PP. 215-220

Keywords: 内隐风险决策,外显风险决策,行为实验
Implicit Risk Decision-Making
, Explicit Risk Decision-Making, Behavioral Experiments

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

文章主要探讨了风险决策研究的现状和方法,以及内隐风险决策和外显风险决策在安全工程领域的应用潜力。文章指出风险是可能性和后果的乘积,在现代社会中,人们需要在不同等级的风险情境下做出决策,而风险决策可以很大程度上决定人的行为以及整个生产系统是否安全。针对风险决策的研究方法,文章介绍了传统的风险决策研究方法的局限性,并提出了采用认知科学技术、行为学实验和神经影像学等多种方法进行风险决策研究的必要性。文章还强调了内隐风险决策与外显风险决策之间的关系以及其在不同文化背景和社会环境下的表现差异,并提出了结合多种方法深入挖掘风险决策的复杂性和多样性的建议。最后,文章通过对风险决策的研究现状进行综述,为安全工程领域的学术研究和实践工作提供启示和借鉴的意义,并建议将心理学和神经科学等跨学科研究成果充分应用于提升安全管理水平,构建更加安全可靠的工作和生活环境。
The paper primarily discusses the current status and methods of research on risk decision-making, as well as the application potential of implicit and explicit risk decision-making in the field of safety engineering. It points out that risk is the product of probability and consequences, and in modern society, people need to make decisions in various levels of risk contexts, where risk decisions can significantly influence human behavior and the overall safety of production systems. Regarding research methods for risk decision-making, the paper introduces the limitations of traditional research methods and suggests the necessity of employing cognitive science techniques, behavioral experiments, and neuroimaging among various methods for studying risk decision-making. It also emphasizes the relationship between implicit and explicit risk decision-making and their manifestations in different cultural backgrounds and social environments, proposing the integration of multiple methods to delve deeper into the complexity and diversity of risk decision-making. Finally, the paper reviews the current status of research on risk decision-making, providing insights and references for academic research and practical work in the field of safety engineering, and recommends the full utilization of interdisciplinary research outcomes from psychology and neuroscience to enhance safety management levels and establish a more secure and reliable working and living environment.

References

[1]  张银玲, 虞祯, 买晓琴. 社会价值取向对自我-他人风险决策的影响及其机制[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(7): 895-908.
[2]  Yates, J. (1992) Risk-Taking Behavior. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
[3]  Sitkin, S.B. and Pablo, A.L. (1992) Reconceptualizing the Determinants of Risk Behavior. Academy of Management Review, 17, 9-38.
https://doi.org/10.2307/258646
[4]  王娟, 戴凤威, 方博. 煤矿事故应急响应的风险决策研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2018, 14(6): 21-26.
[5]  王剑, 司徒陈麒, 袁胜强. 基于多主体和前景理论的应急风险决策仿真研究[J]. 系统仿真学报, 2020, 32(3): 353-361.
[6]  Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D. and Anderson,S. (1994) Insensitivity to Future Consequences Following Damage to Human Prefrontal Cortex. Cognition, 50, 7-15.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)90018-3
[7]  杨佳丽. 煤矿员工不安全行为影响因素及其管理策略研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 太原: 太原理工大学, 2017.
[8]  Lejuez, C.W., Read, J.P., Kahler, C.W., Richards, J.B., Ramsey, S.E., Stuart, G.L., et al. (2002) Evaluation of a Behavioral Measure of Risk Taking: The Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 75-84.
https://doi.org/10.1037//1076-898X.8.2.75
[9]  Lejuez, C.W., Aklin, W., Daughters, S., Zvolensky, M., Kahler, C. and Gwadz, M. (2007) Reliability and Validity of the Youth Version of the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART-Y) in the Assessment of Risk-Taking Behavior among Inner-City Adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36, 106-111.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp3601_11
[10]  Anokhin, A.P., Golosheykin, S., Grant, J. and Heath, A.C. (2009) Heritability of Risk-Taking in Adolescence: Alongitudinal Twin Study. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 12, 366-371.
https://doi.org/10.1375/twin.12.4.366
[11]  Duell, N., Steinberg, L., Icenogle, G., Chein, J., Chaudhary, N., di Giunta, L., et al. (2018) Age Patterns in Risk Taking across the World. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47, 1052-1072.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0752-y
[12]  Kim, M., Kim, S., Lee, K. U. and Jeong, B. (2020). Pessimistically Biased Perception in Panic Disorder during Risk Learning. Depression and Anxiety, 37, 609-619.
https://doi.org/10.1002/da.23007
[13]  Liu, Z., Liu, T. and Mu, S. (2021) Gender Differences in the Effects of Competition and Cooperation on Risk Taking ‐ under Ambiguity. PsyCh Journal, 10, 374-383.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.419
[14]  Mason, A.E., Schleicher, S., Coccia, M., Epel, E. S. and Aschbacher, K. (2018) Chronic Stress and Impulsive Risk Taking Predict Increases in Visceral Fat over 18‐Months. Obesity, 26, 869-876.
https://doi.org/10.1002/oby.22150
[15]  Loosemore, M. and Malouf, N. (2019) Safety Training and Positive Safety Attitude Formation in the Australian Construction Industry. Safety Science, 113, 233-243.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.11.029
[16]  王宇, 陈晨, 杨韵莹, 郑娅峰, 董艳. 同伴互动的认知神经机制研究分析与未来展望[J]. 电化教育研究, 2022, 43(2): 26-33.
[17]  杨春江, 陈亚硕. 认知-动机-关系理论视角下辱虐管理对员工留职的作用机制研究[J]. 管理学报, 2022, 19(5): 676-686.
[18]  卢洋. 内隐序列知识的外显转化及其脑机制[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2022.
[19]  刘锐. 基于磁共振成像技术的飞行员大脑皮层结构探索性研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 北京: 中国民用航空飞行学院, 2022.
[20]  郭婷婷. 情绪冲突和一般认知冲突脑机制的重合与分离[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 大连: 辽宁师范大学, 2022.
[21]  孙杰. 基于迁移学习的脑认知状态识别方法研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 秦皇岛: 燕山大学, 2021.
[22]  冯廷勇, 王雪珂, 苏缇. 拖延行为的发展认知机制及神经基础[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(4): 586-596.
[23]  Zhang, R., Chen, Z., Xu, T., Zhang, L. and Feng, T. (2020). The Overlapping Region in Right Hippocampus Accounting for the Link between Trait Anxiety and Procrastination. Neuropsychologia, 146, Article ID: 107571.
[24]  王笑男. 基于驾驶员脑认知特性的草原公路交叉口交通标志组合研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2021.

Full-Text

comments powered by Disqus

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133

WeChat 1538708413