Understanding how objective quantities are translated into subjective evaluations has long been of interest to social scientists, medical professionals, and policymakers with an interest in how people process and act on quantitative information. The theory of decision by sampling proposes a comparative procedure: Values seem larger or smaller based on how they rank in a comparison set, the decision sample. But what values are included in this decision sample? We identify and test four mechanistic accounts, each suggesting that how previously encountered attribute values are processed determines whether they linger in the sample to guide the subjective interpretation, and thus the influence, of newly encountered values. Testing our ideas through studies of loss aversion, delay discounting, and vaccine hesitancy, we find strongest support for one account: Quantities need to be subjectively evaluated-rather than merely encountered-for them to enter the decision sample, alter the subjective interpretation of other values, and then guide decision making. Discussion focuses on how the present findings inform understanding of the nature of the decision sample and identify new research directions for the longstanding question of how comparison standards influence decision making. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

评价本质上是比较性的，但比较的是什么呢？


了解客观数量如何转化为主观评估长期以来一直是社会科学家、医学专业人士和政策制定者的兴趣所在，他们对人们如何处理定量信息并采取行动感兴趣。抽样决策理论提出了一种比较程序：值看起来更大或更小，取决于它们在比较集（决策样本）中的排名。但是这个决策样本中包含哪些值呢？我们识别并测试了四个机械解释，每个解释都表明先前遇到的属性值的处理方式决定了它们是否留在样本中以指导主观解释，从而影响新遇到的值。通过对损失厌恶、延迟贴现和疫苗犹豫的研究来测试我们的想法，我们发现对一种说法最有力的支持：需要对数量进行主观评估，而不仅仅是遇到数量，以便它们进入决策样本，改变对其他数量的主观解释。值，然后指导决策。讨论的重点是当前的研究结果如何帮助理解决策样本的性质，并为比较标准如何影响决策这一长期存在的问题确定新的研究方向。 （PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2024 APA，保留所有权利）。