심적 시뮬레이션(Mental Simulation)의 활용 유형에 영향을 미치는 요인에 관한 연구: 개인 특성과 과업 특성에 의한 차이를 중심으로 (Factors Affecting Types of Mental Simulation: Individual Characteristic and Task Characteristic)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국소비자학회
· 수록지 정보 : 소비자학연구 / 23권 / 4호 / 261 ~ 285페이지
· 저자명 : 권익현, 이진석

초록

본 연구는 인지적 프로세스에 영향을 미치는 사고방식 중 하나인 심적 시뮬레이션(mental simulation)의 선택에 영향을 미치는 선행 요소에 대하여 고찰하였다. 첫째, 개인이 사용하는 심적 시뮬레이션 유형에 영향을 미치는 요인으로 개인특성을 제시하고 검증하였다. 개인특성으로는 일반적인 행동에 대한 자기조절 성향으로 이동모드(locomotion mode)와 평가모드(assessment mode)로 구분하는 개인특성인 조절모드(regulatory mode)를 활용하였다. 둘째, 개인의 심적 시뮬레이션의 활용 유형에 영향을 미치는 또 다른 요인으로서 과업 특성(task characteristic)을 제시하고 검증하였다. 과업 특성을 결정하는 요인으로 과업의 과정과 결과에 대한 현저성을 활용하였다.
가설은 각각의 구성 변수에 대한 과거 문헌 연구에 근거하여 다음과 같이 설정하였다. 먼저 개인의 조절 모드 성향에 따라 심적 시뮬레이션의 유형 활용에 있어서 차이가 나타날 것을 예상하였다. 구체적으로, 이동모드의 사람일수록 결과 중심적인 사고를 할 것이고 평가모드의 사람일수록 과정 중심적인 사고를 할 것이라고 가설을 설정하였다. 다음으로, 과업 특성에 따라 개인이 사용하는 심적 시뮬레이션 유형이 차이가 나타날 것으로 예상하였다. 구체적으로 결과에 대한 현저성이 높을수록 결과 중심적인 시뮬레이션을 할 것이고 과정에 대한 현저성이 높을수록 과정중심의 시뮬레이션을 할 것이라고 가설을 설정하였다.
이러한 연구의 목적과 가설 검증을 위하여 실험 연구를 진행하였다. 실험은 새로운 오피스용 소프트웨어, 새로운 여행 상품, 새로운 취미생활의 3가지의 과업 상황을 시나리오로 작성하여 활용하였다. 피험자가 심적 시뮬레이션에 사용한 유형의 비중(과정 중심 vs. 결과 중심)을 측정하였고, 조절모드 척도(Kruglanski et al. 2000)를 통해 피험자의 개인 특성을 측정하고, 과업 특성의 경우 과업별 결과와 과정에 대해 떠오르는 생생함 정도를 측정하였다.
연구 결과, 조절모드 성향에 따라 개인이 사용하는 심적 시뮬레이션의 유형이 차이가 나타났다. 가설에서 제시한 것과 같이 이동 모드 일수록 결과중심 시뮬레이션을 하는 것으로 나타났고, 평가 모드 일수록 과정중심 시뮬레이션을 하는 것으로 나타났다. 그리고 과업 특성에 의한 효과는 제한적으로 확인되었다. 피험자들은 과정이 결과보다 상대적으로 더 생생하게 떠오르는 과업에서 기타 과업들에서 보다 과정 중심적인 심적 시뮬레이션을 더 활용하는 것으로 나타났다. 그러나 본 연구에서의 이러한 결과는 과정과 결과에 대한 생생함 정도에 있어서의 상대적 차이만을 확인하였다는 면에서 제한적이라고 보아야 할 것이다.

영어초록

People imagine their future. They think not only about events that they will do or experience, but they also imagine virtual events that would never happen to them. To imagine future virtual events is defined as mental simulation. Researchers have examined people's ability of mental simulation and implication of mental simulation in variety psychology research area, such as cognitive psychology, developmental psychology, social psychology(e.g. Singer 1972; Davies and Stone 1995).
Taylor and Schneider(1989) defined a mental simulation as the imitative representation of real or virtual events. They suggested that mental simulation can serve important function for turning imagined experience into action. Mental simulation can increase the perceived validity of imagined experience and provide the organization of experience. Then, it increases the expectancy that people will meet imagined experience, and it generates motivation. There are various types of mental simulation such as process-focused vs. outcome-focused mental simulation, retrospective vs. anticipatory mental simulation, problem-focused vs. solution-focused mental simulation. However all types of mental simulation don't equally impact on people's attitude, intention, real act. Specifically, distinction between process-focused and outcome-focused mental simulation have the highest discriminating power on those variables(Taylor et al. 1998).
Among varied distinctions concerning different types of mental simulation, process-focused mental simulation and outcome-focused mental simulation has been a research focus of researchers in psychology, education and consumer behavior. In psychology, researchers have focused on a goal achievement and self-regulation. Taylor et al.(1998) showed that outcome-focused mental simulation is more effective on motivation for attaining goal while process-focused mental simulation is more effective on making plans and emotional self-regulation. People with process-focused mental simulation can make higher performance than people with outcome-focused mental simulation(Oettingen and Mayer 2002; Pham and Talyor 1999; Rivkin and Taylor 1999; Taylor et al. 1998). Some research reported contracting results against finding described above (Fanning 1994; Thompson et al. 2009).
In consumer research, the impact of mental simulation on consumers' attitude, decision making, and purchase intention etc. when consumer make purchasing decisions, they can imagine the process of using the product or the benefit of having product. Consumers' attitude and purchase intention toward alternatives can be different, depending on consumers' focus on whether process or outcome.
As discussed so far, most of mental simulation research have attended to varied results generated by adopting different types of mental simulation in terms of various constructs. On the other hands, this study examined factors affecting people to rely on different types of mental simulation. First, we investigated individual difference. We adopted regulatory mode as an individual characteristic. Human behaviors are mostly the result of combining two essential regulatory mode: assessment mode and locomotion mode. Assessment mode is related to critical evaluation of entities or states, such as goals or means in relation to alternatives in order to judge relative quality. By contrast, locomotion mode means the tendency to movement from state to state and commitment to the psychological resources that will initiate and maintain goal-directed progress directly, without undue distractions or delays(Kruglanski et al. 2000). We hypothesize that locomotion-oriented people tend to use outcome-focused mental simulation more and assessment-oriented people may adopt process-focused mental simulation more.
Secondly, this study examined the influence of a task characteristic as the factor affecting types of mental simulation. We adopted perceived salience toward process and outcome as a task characteristic. Nisbett and Ross(1980) suggested that vivid information can attract or hold people's attention, interesting, emotional arousal more than non-vivid information, and that people also can deliberate vivid information more easily. Many research have demonstrated that when people process salient information, people tend to overestimate the extents to which two phenomena are associated(Chapman 1967; Hamilton and Gifford 1976; Sanbonmatsu et al. 1987, 1994). We expect that people would rely on outcome-focused mental simulation more if they can envision outcomes more vividly. On the other hands, if people can imagine a process more vividly, they would use process-focused mental simulation more.
In order to test our hypotheses, we conducted an experiment. 72 male and 75 female attended our experiment. We examined the effects of individual and the task characteristic on the weight of subjects' reliance on different types of mental simulation regarding 3 tasks. We developed 3 scenarios for tasks of new office software, new travel package and new hobby practice. Participants were inquired to read 3 separate scenarios. Then, they were asked to imagine the situation where they really make decisions concerning those tasks. Then relative reliance on different types of mental simulations, the vividness of outcome and process, regulatory mode scale and some potential confounding variables were measured.
Research results supported the hypotheses related to individual differences. Research results of two tasks out of three tasks supported hypothesis statistically. As we expected, people with high locomotion mode tended to use outcome-focused mental simulation more while people with high assessment mode relied more on process-focused mental simulation.
The hypothesis about the task characteristic were supported partially. Research results showed that subjects relied relatively more on process-focused mental simulation when they could imagine process more vividly than outcome. Unfortunately, however these findings confirmed relative differences only.

참고자료

· 없음