바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

ISSN : 1229-067X

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.30 No.3
Citation Share

위험사건에 대한 비현실적 낙관주의: 직접 대 간접 측정방법과 사건 빈도 효과

Unrealistic Optimism about Risky Events: Direct versus Indirect Measures and Event Frequency Effect

한국심리학회지: 일반 / Korean Journal of Psychology: General, (P)1229-067X; (E)2734-1127
2011, v.30 no.3, pp.647-662
이나경 (이화여자대학교)
이나경. (2011). 위험사건에 대한 비현실적 낙관주의: 직접 대 간접 측정방법과 사건 빈도 효과. 한국심리학회지: 일반, 30(3), 647-662.
  • 다운로드 수
  • 조회수
PDF 다운로드

초록

사람들은 자신이 부정적인 사건을 경험할 가능성은 평균의 다른 사람보다 더 적다고 믿는 경향이 있다. 이런 비현실적 낙관주의는 직접과 간접, 두 가지 방법으로 측정되고 있다. 본 연구는 다양한 위험사건들을 사용하여 직접과 간접방법으로 평가한 비현실적 낙관주의를 비교하기 위한 목적으로 수행되었다. 연구 1은 두 평가방법이 비현실적 낙관주의의 강도에서, 그리고 주요 위험특성들-빈도, 통제, 심각성, 가용성-과 비현실적 낙관주의 사이의 상관관계에서 차이가 있는지를 검증하였다. 직접과 간접방법으로 측정한 비현실적 낙관주의는 강도 뿐 아니라 위험특성들과의 상관관계에서도 유의미한 차이를 보였다. 연구 2는 사건의 빈도가 직접과 간접방법의 비현실적 낙관주의에 미치는 영향에서 차이가 있는지를 실험하였다. 직접방법에서는 빈도가 높은 사건보다 낮은 사건에서 더 강한 비현실적 낙관주의가 발생하는 빈도 효과가 나타나서 기존의 자기중심성 가설이 지지되었다. 또한 간접방법에서는 정반대의 빈도 효과가 발견되었는데, 즉, 빈도가 낮은 사건보다 높은 사건에서 더 강한 비현실적 낙관주의가 발생하는 새로운 결과가 나타났다. 직접과 간접방법의 비현실적 낙관주의에서 일어나는 사건 빈도 효과에 대하여 논의하였다.

keywords
비현실적 낙관주의, 직접 대 간접 측정방법, 사건 빈도 효과, 자기중심성, 위험사건, Unrealistic optimism, direct vs. indirect measures, event frequency effect, egocentrism, risky events

Abstract

People tend to believe that they are less likely than the average person to experience negative events. Such unrealistic optimism has been assessed in two ways, direct and indirect measures. Using various risky events, the present studies compared unrealistic optimism in these two methods. Study 1 investigated whether there is difference between these two methods in the magnitude of unrealistic optimism, and in the correlation between unrealistic optimism and major event characteristics-perceived frequency, controllability, severity, availability. The two measures showed significant difference not only in magnitude of unrealistic optimism but also in the correlation between unrealistic optimism and risk characteristics. Studey 2 tested empirically whether event frequency influenced differently in unrealistic optimism of direct and indirect method. The direct method produced stronger unrealistic optimism when an event absolute frequency is low rather than high, which supported the existing egocentrism account. In the indirect method, however, an opposite effect was found, namely, unrealistic optimism was significantly stronger when an event absolute frequency is high rather than low, which showed novel results. The effects of event frequency in direct and indirect method were discussed.

keywords
비현실적 낙관주의, 직접 대 간접 측정방법, 사건 빈도 효과, 자기중심성, 위험사건, Unrealistic optimism, direct vs. indirect measures, event frequency effect, egocentrism, risky events

참고문헌

1.

Alicke, M. D. (1985). Global self-evaluation as determined by the desirability and controllability of trait adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1621-1630.

2.

Aucote, H. M., & Gold, R. S. (2005). Non-equivalence of direct and indirect measures of unrealistic optimism. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 10, 194-201.

3.

Blanton, H., Axsom, D., McClive, K., & Price, S. (2001). Pessimistic bias in comparative evaluations: A case of perceived invulnerability to the effects of negative life events. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1627-1636.

4.

Chambers, J., & Suls, J. (2007). The role of egocentrism and focalism in the emotion intensity bias. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 618-625.

5.

Chambers, J., & Windschitl, P. D. (2004). Biases in social comparative judgments: The role of nonmotivated factors in above-average and comparative-optimism effects. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 813-838.

6.

Chambers, J., Windschitl, P. D., & Suls, J. (2003). Egocentrism, event frequency, and comparative optimism: When what happens frequently is “more likely to happen to me.” Personality and social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1343-1356.

7.

Eiser, J. R., Pahl, S., & Prins, Y. R. A. (2001). Optimism, pessimism, and the direction of self-other comparison. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 77-84.

8.

Harris, P., Griffin, D. W., & Murray, S. (2008). Testing the limits of optimistic bias: Event and person moderators in a multilevel framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1225-1237.

9.

Helweg-Larsen, M., & Shepperd, J. A. (2001). Do moderators of the optimistic bias affect personal or target estimates? A review of the literature. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 74-95.

10.

Klar, Y., & Giladi, E. E. (1999). Are most people happier than their peers, or are they just happy? Personality and social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 585-594.

11.

Klar, Y., Medding, A., Sarel, D. (1996). Nonunique invulnerability: Singular versus distributional probabilities and unrealistic optimism in comparative risk judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decisions Processes, 67, 229-245.

12.

Klein, C. T. F., & Helweg-Larsen, M. (2002). Perceived control and the optimistic Bias: A meta-analytic review. Psychology and Health, 17, 437-446.

13.

Kruger, J. (1999). Lake Wobegon be gone! The “below average effect” and the egocentric nature of comparative ability judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 221-232.

14.

Kruger, J., & Burrus, J. (2004). Egocentrism and focalism in unrealistic optimism (and pessimism). Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 332-340.

15.

Price, P. C., Pentecost, H. C., & Voth, R. M. (2002). Perceived event frequency and the optimistic bias: Evidence for a two-process model of personal risk judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 242-252.

16.

Rose, J. P., & Windschitl, P. D. (2008). How egocentrism and optimism change in response to feedback in repeated competitions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105, 210-220.

17.

Rose, J. P., Endo, Y., Windschitl, P. D., & Suls, J. (2008). Cultural differences in unrelaistic optimism and pessimism: The role of egocentrism and direct versus indirect comparison measures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1236-1248.

18.

Weinstein, N. D. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 806-820.

19.

Weinstein, N. D. (1984). Why it won't happen to me: Perceptions of risk factors and susceptibility. Health Psychology, 3, 431-457.

20.

Weinstein, N. D. (1987). Unrealistic optimism about susceptibility to health problems: Conclusions from a community-wide sample. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 10, 481-500.

21.

Weinstein, N. D., & Klein, W. M. (1996). Unrealistic optimism: Present and future. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15, 1-8.

한국심리학회지: 일반

논문 투고 OA 정책