A failed attempt to explain within subject variation in risk taking behavior using domain specific risk attitudes

2013 ◽  
Vol 87 ◽  
pp. 1-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cary Deck ◽  
Jungmin Lee ◽  
Javier A. Reyes ◽  
Christopher C. Rosen
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neeltje Blankenstein ◽  
Jorien van Hoorn ◽  
Tycho Dekkers ◽  
Arne Popma ◽  
Brenda Jansen ◽  
...  

Adolescence is a phase of heightened risk taking compared to childhood and adulthood, which is even more prominent for specific adolescent populations, such as youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Until now little is known about how perceived risks and benefits relate to adolescent risk taking. Here, we used the adolescent version of the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DoSpeRT) scale to investigate the likelihood of risk taking, perceived risks, perceived benefits, and their tradeoff in two studies. In the first longitudinal study, 375 11-to-23-year-olds completed the DOSPERT one up to three times. A second biannual longitudinal study included 180 11-to-20-year old boys diagnosed with ADHD (N=81), and an IQ and age-matched control group (N=99). Using mixed-effects models, we found a peak in likelihood of risk taking in mid-to-late adolescence, but only in the health/safety, ethical, and social domains of risk taking, with similar curvilinear patterns in perceived benefits (peaks) and perceived risks (dips). In both cohorts, perceived risks and benefits were significant predictors of risk taking in all domains, and perceived benefits related more strongly to risk taking than perceived risks. Moreover, perceived benefits increasingly related to risk taking across adolescence, a pattern that was found in recreational risk taking in both studies. Generally, we observed little differences in risk taking, and perceived risks and benefits between the ADHD and control group. However, risk-return models indicated that adolescents with ADHD displayed a heightened likelihood of risk-taking behavior in the social domain, and their perceived risks related less strongly to risk taking, relative to typically developing adolescents. Taken together, our results are consistent with the developmental peak in risk taking observed in real life and highlight the role of perceived risks and benefits in risk taking. These findings provide tentative entry points for possible prevention and intervention.


Author(s):  
Ann-Renee Blais ◽  
Elke U. Weber

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas Keller ◽  
Maik Bieleke ◽  
Wanja Wolff

Arguably, extreme sports athletes exhibit a more significant risk appetite than the general public. Are standard behavioral risk measures able to capture this? To answer this question, we assessed self-reports of risk taking and measured the risk-taking behavior of samples of snowboarders and climbers. Two groups of non-athletes, university students and crowdworkers, and athletes of a sport that does not include the potential of grave injury or death, esports athletes, serve as control conditions and complement our study. Across these five different groups, 1313 participants performed an online version of the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) and gave self-reports of general risk-taking propensity and sports-specific risk taking. Extreme sports athletes exhibited greater risk propensity in the BART than non-athletes and esports athletes. Furthermore, BART-performance predicted sports-specific risk taking and its affective consequences. Our results speak to the BART’s ecological validity and the unique role of physical consequences on risk-taking behavior.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao-Tian Wang ◽  
Rui Zheng ◽  
Yan-Hua Xuan ◽  
Jie Chen ◽  
Shu Li

Risk Analysis ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (11) ◽  
pp. 2119-2131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madison Sween ◽  
Andrea Ceschi ◽  
Francesco Tommasi ◽  
Riccardo Sartori ◽  
Joshua Weller

Author(s):  
Douglas Van Bossuyt ◽  
Chris Hoyle ◽  
Irem Y. Tumer ◽  
Andy Dong

AbstractEngineering risk methods and tools account for and make decisions about risk using an expected-value approach. Psychological research has shown that stakeholders and decision makers hold domain-specific risk attitudes that often vary between individuals and between enterprises. Moreover, certain companies and industries (e.g., the nuclear power industry and aerospace corporations) are very risk-averse whereas other organizations and industrial sectors (e.g., IDEO, located in the innovation and design sector) are risk tolerant and actually thrive by making risky decisions. Engineering risk methods such as failure modes and effects analysis, fault tree analysis, and others are not equipped to help stakeholders make decisions under risk-tolerant or risk-averse decision-making conditions. This article presents a novel method for translating engineering risk data from the expected-value domain into a risk appetite corrected domain using utility functions derived from the psychometric Engineering Domain-Specific Risk-Taking test results under a single-criterion decision-based design approach. The method is aspirational rather than predictive in nature through the use of a psychometric test rather than lottery methods to generate utility functions. Using this method, decisions can be made based upon risk appetite corrected risk data. We discuss development and application of the method based upon a simplified space mission design in a collaborative design-center environment. The method is shown to change risk-based decisions in certain situations where a risk-averse or risk-tolerant decision maker would likely choose differently than the expected-value approach dictates.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document