The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits

Existing research shows that evaluations of the risks and benefits of various hazards (i.e., technologies and activities) are inversely related. The affect heuristic explains the negative relation between risks and benefits, as based on the strength of positive or negative affect associated with a hazard. Research on the affect heuristic previously investigated under which conditions people judge risk and benefits independently, focusing on expertise as a factor that might exempt from inversely related judgements of risk and benefits. Measurements within Dual Process Theories have been found to be associated with rational, analytical decision making and accurate judgments. In this paper we investigated the extent to which rational information processing styles can predict the risk-benefit relation of technologies in a medical and food applications and whether the attitudes influence the strength or direction of the relationship. Using the Need for Cognition Scale (NFC), a psychometric-based risk scale and an explicit measure of attitude, in a representative sample of 3228 Swedes, we found that the high NFC group judged the risks and benefits of technologies to be inversely related. In contrast, the low NFC group judged the risks and benefits to be positively related. These results were confirmed across all studied technologies by applying moderation analysis. We discuss the results in light of recent research on cognitive processing and polarization over technologies’ risks.

Download Full-text

An Investigation of the Affect Heuristic in the Brazilian Stock Market

International Journal of Applied Behavioral Economics ◽

10.4018/ijabe.2015010102 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 20-41

Author(s):

Ricardo Alonso Gonzalez ◽

Adriano Leal Bruni

Keyword(s):

Factor Analysis ◽

Logistic Regression ◽

Stock Market ◽

Financial Market ◽

Negative Association ◽

T Test ◽

Perceived Knowledge ◽

Affect Heuristic ◽

Risks And Benefits ◽

Stock Market Investors

It is considered that decisions are influenced, even in part, by aspects of affect. It is agreed with that studies that suggest the action of the affect heuristic, which can influence the perception of risks and benefits, even in environments where rationality should be more prominent, such as in the financial market. This paper investigates how risks and benefits are perceived by Brazilian stock market investors. Additionally, it investigates whether these aspects could be explained by gender, age or perceived knowledge about the market. The analysis makes use of the t-test, logistic regression and factor analysis and is applied to a sample consisting of 143 investors. The results confirm the existence of the affect heuristic and a negative association between perceived knowledge of the market and the affect heuristic.

Download Full-text

Risky Therefore Not Beneficial: Replication and Extension of Finucane et al.’s (2000) Affect Heuristic Experiment

Social Psychological and Personality Science ◽

10.1177/19485506211056761 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 194855062110567

Author(s):

Emir Efendić ◽

Subramanya Prasad Chandrashekar ◽

Cheong Shing Lee ◽

Lok Yan Yeung ◽

Min Ji Kim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Negative Relationship ◽

Data Sets ◽

Affect Heuristic ◽

Risks And Benefits ◽

Strong Negative Relationship ◽

Analytic Strategy

Risks and benefits are negatively related in people’s minds. Finucane et al. causally demonstrated that increasing risks of a hazard leads people to judge its benefits as lower. Vice versa, increasing benefits leads people to judge its risks as lower (original: r = −.74 [−0.92, −0.30]). This finding is consistent with an affective explanation, and the negative relationship is often presented as evidence for an affect heuristic. In two well-powered studies, using a more stringent analytic strategy, we replicated the original finding. We observed a strong negative relationship between judgments of risks and benefits across three technologies, although we do find that there was no change in risks when highlighting low benefits. We note that risks seem to be more responsive to manipulation (as opposed to benefits) and find evidence that the negative relationship can depend on incidental mood. We provided materials, data sets, and analyses on https://osf.io/sufjn/?view_only=6f8f5dc6ff524149a4ed5c6de9296ae8 .

Download Full-text