死亡悖论视角下群体性主观概率偏差仿真研究

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.06.005

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (6): 37-43.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.06.005

• 安全社会科学与安全管理 • 上一篇下一篇

死亡悖论视角下群体性主观概率偏差仿真研究

张羽讲师, 谯丽, 岑康教授

西南石油大学土木工程与测绘学院,四川成都 610500

收稿日期:2021-03-05 修回日期:2021-05-11 出版日期:2021-06-28 发布日期:2021-12-28
作者简介:张羽 (1986—),男,江西新余人,博士,讲师,硕士生导师,主要从事安全知识与行为、安全监管博弈等方面的研究。E-mail: 307871884@qq.com。
基金资助:
教育部人文社会科学青年基金资助(14XJCZH004);教育部产学合作协同育人项目(201802339011)。

Simulation research on group subjective probability deviationfrom a perspective of death paradox

ZHANG Yu, QIAO Li, CEN Kang

School of Civil Engineering and Geomatics, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu Sichuan 610500, China

Received:2021-03-05 Revised:2021-05-11 Online:2021-06-28 Published:2021-12-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为探究安全生产过程中群体性主观概率偏差的形成与演化机制,构建个体主观概率元胞自动机(CA)模型,运用Netlogo仿真平台进行仿真试验;先对比分析仿真图形,再运用层次回归法分析试验所得数据。研究结果表明:群体主观概率演化过程分为激变、波动、稳定3个时期;个体死亡会导致群体的主观概率出现系统性低估,且会加剧群体内部的主观概率差异;客观事故概率的减少会增大群体内部主观概率的差异;群体人数增加有助于减少主观概率偏差和差异,促使群体主观概率估计更客观、更统一。

关键词: 死亡悖论, 主观概率, 元胞自动机(CA), 群体性偏差, 层次回归分析

Abstract: In order to study formation and evolution of group subjective probability deviation in the process of safe production, a CA model of individual subjective probability was constructed and simulation experiments were conducted by using Netlogo simulation platform. Then, simulated graphics were compared and analyzed, and hierarchical regression method was used to analyze experiment data. The results show that evolution process of subjective probability of a group is divided into three periods, namely sudden change, fluctuation, and stability. Individual death will lead to a systematic underestimation of subjective probability, and aggravate its difference within the group. Reduction of objective accident probability will also increase difference in subjective probability. However, an increase in the number of group members helps to reduce such deviation and difference, and promotes a more objective and unified estimation of subjective probability of a group.

Key words: death paradox, subjective probability, cellular automata (CA), group bias, hierarchical regression analysis

中图分类号:

X915.2

张羽, 谯丽, 岑康. 死亡悖论视角下群体性主观概率偏差仿真研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(6): 37-43.

ZHANG Yu, QIAO Li, CEN Kang. Simulation research on group subjective probability deviationfrom a perspective of death paradox[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(6): 37-43.

参考文献

[1] 张舒, 史秀志. 安全心理与行为干预的研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2011,21(1): 23-31.
ZHANG Shu, SHI Xiuzhi. Study on safety psychology and behavior intervention [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2011,21(1): 23-31.
[2] 叶贵, 越宏哲, 杨晶晶,等. 建筑工人认知水平对不安全行为影响仿真研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019,29(9): 36-42.
YE Gui, YUE Hongzhe, YANG Jingjing, et al. Simulation study on influences of construction workers' bounded rational cognition on unsafe behaviors [J].China Safety Science Journal, 2019,29(9): 36-42.
[3] JI Ming, YOU Xuqun, LAN Jijun, et al. The impact of risk tolerance, risk perception and hazardous attitude on safety operation among airline pilots in China [J].Safety Science, 2011,49(10): 1 412-1 420.
[4] 李乃文,王春迪,黄敏. 基于Multi-agent的矿工风险感知偏差演化模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2015,25(9): 47-52.
LI Naiwen, WANG Chundi, HUANG Min. Multi-agent-based model for evolution of miners' risk perception deviation [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2015,25(9): 47-52.
[5] KOUABENAN D R, NGUEUTSA R, MBAYE S. Safety climate, perceived risk, and involvement in safety management [J].Safety Science, 2015,77: 72-79.
[6] 李华强,龚乐,范春梅. 药品安全事件中公众应对行为的形成机制[J]. 公共管理学报, 2019,16(3): 97-107.
LI Huaqiang, GONG Le, FAN Chunmei. The formation mechanism of the public's coping behavior in drug safety events [J].Journal of Public Management, 2019,16(3): 97-107.
[7] TORBJRN R, TROND N. Judgement of transport security, risk sensitivity and travel mode use in urban areas [J]. Sustainability, 2019,11(7): 1-12.
[8] 袁轩, 陈瑶, 袁国常.硐室施工人员风险感知的心理距离模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019,29(5): 31-36.
YUAN Xuan,CHEN Yao,YUAN Guochang.Study on psychological distance model of risk perception of cavern construction workers [J].China Safety Science Journal, 2019,29(5): 31-36.
[9] 余建华,孙丽. 国外风险认知研究:回顾与前瞻 [J]. 灾害学, 2020,35(1): 161-166.
YU Jianhua, SUN Li. A study of foreign risk perception: retrospect and prediction [J]. Journal of Catastrophology, 2020,35(1): 161-166.
[10] 向玲,王宝玺,张庆林. 主观概率判断中次可加性的三因素实验研究 [J]. 心理科学, 2007,30(1): 253-255.
XIANG Ling, WANG Baoxi, ZHANG Qinglin. A three-factor experimental study of sub-additivity in subjective probability [J].Psychological Science, 2007,30(1): 253-255.
[11] SHAROT T. The optimism bias [J]. Current Biology, 2011,21(23): 941-945.
[12] POLMAN E, RUSSO J E. Commitment to a developing preference and predecisional distortion of information [J]. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 2012,119(1): 78-88.
[13] 张萍,卢家楣,张敏. 心境对未来事件发生概率判断的影响 [J]. 心理科学, 2012,35(1): 100-104.
ZHANG Ping, LU Jiamei, ZHANG Min. The effect of mood on the probability judgment of future events [J].Psychological Science, 2012,35(1): 100-104.
[14] 段婧,刘永芳,何琪. 决策者角色及相关变量对风险偏好的影响 [J]. 心理学报, 2012,44(3): 369-376.
DUAN Jing, LIU Yongfang, HE Qi. The effects of decision makers' roles and related variables on risk preferences [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2012,44(3): 369-376.
[15] WANG Ting, WANG Dashun. Why amazon's ratings might mislead you: the story of herding effects [J]. Big Data, 2014,2(4): 196-204.
[16] 陈庆,何泉,陈广耀,等. 复杂情境下不同角度及思维方式的决策表现差异:决策视角-心理距离的作用 [J]. 心理学报, 2017,49(3): 383-392.
CHEN Qing, HE Quan, CHEN Guangyao, et al. The perspective-distance effect hypothesis:different perspectives and thinking modes lead to different decision-making performance in complex condition [J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017,49(3): 383-392.
[17] HILBERT M. Toward a synthesis of cognitive biases: how noisy information processing can bias human decision making [J].Psychological Bulletin, 2012,138(2): 211-237.
[18] 邱晓雯,张钦. 决策过程中情感因素影响主观概率估计的实证研究 [J]. 浙江社会科学, 2014(3): 85-89.
[19] SCHWARTZSTEIN J. Selective attention and learning [J]. Journal of the European Economic Association, 2014,12(6): 1 423-1 452.
[20] PACHUR T, SUTER R S, HERTWIG R. How the twain can meet: prospect theory and models of heuristics in risky choice [J]. Cognitive Psychology, 2017,93: 44-73.
[21] FIEDLER K. Beware of samples! a cognitive-ecological sampling approach to judgment biases [J]. Psychological Review, 2000,107(4): 659-676.
[22] 张羽,卞晓莉,刘红勇. 个体死亡对施工安全事故学习的影响路径分析 [J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018,28(4): 151-156.
ZHANG Yu, BIAN Xiaoli, LIU Hongyong. Path analysis of impact of individual death on construction safety accident learning [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018,28(4): 151-156.
[23] 克里斯蒂安·FG·申德拉[德]. SPSS回归分析[M].宋武,译.北京:电子工业出版社,2015: 37-42.
SCHENDE FG C. Regressionsanalyse mit SPSS[M].SONG Wu, Translated.Beijing: Publishing House of Electronics Industry, 2015: 37-42.

死亡悖论视角下群体性主观概率偏差仿真研究

Simulation research on group subjective probability deviationfrom a perspective of death paradox

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 7

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	冯诚, 杨静, 张红亮, 冯焕东. 基于组合模型的地铁车站行人疏散仿真优化研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(8): 49-54.
[2]	陈亮, 何志超, 李巧茹, 何涛. 多车道城市快速路交织区拥堵形成机制[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(6): 73-78.
[3]	张羽, 卞晓莉, 刘红勇. 个体死亡对施工安全事故学习的影响路径分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(4): 151-156.
[4]	王茹, 周磊, 刘俊. 基于改进蚁群算法的元胞自动机疏散模型研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(1): 38-43.
[5]	庞明宝, 任泊宁. 高速公路弯道雨天可能交通事故的CA模型仿真[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(7): 24-29.
[6]	王丹, 宫晶晶, 崔丽淼. 代际下破坏性领导对矿工安全绩效影响研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(2): 24-29.
[7]	王起全, 王鸿鹏. 基于情景构建的危化品事故应急疏散模拟研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(12): 147-152.