scholarly journals Percentage and verbal category measures of risk likelihood

1997 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil D. Weinstein ◽  
Michael A. Diefenbach
2016 ◽  
Vol 48 (11) ◽  
pp. 1410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing LI ◽  
Antao CHEN ◽  
Jie CHEN ◽  
Changquan LONG
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Natalia Besedovsky

This chapter studies calculative risk-assessment practices in credit rating agencies. It identifies two fundamentally different methodological approaches for producing ratings, which in turn shape the respective conceptions of credit risk. The traditional approach sees ‘risk’ as an only partially calculable and predictable set of hazards that should be avoided or minimized. This approach is particularly evident in the production of country credit ratings and gives rise to ordinal rankings of risk. By contrast, structured finance rating practices conceive of ‘risk’ as both fully calculable and controllable; they construct cardinal measures of risk by assuming that ontological uncertainty does not exist and that models can capture all possible events in a probabilistic manner. This assumption—that uncertainty can be turned into measurable risk—is a necessary precondition for structured finance securities and has become an influential imaginary in financial markets.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Berkhouch ◽  
Ghizlane Lakhnati ◽  
Marcelo Brutti Righi
Keyword(s):  

2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcela Perez ◽  
Esther Casanueva ◽  
Jessica de Haene ◽  
Adalberto Parra ◽  
Janet C King

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary P. Brown

Aversion to risk is a prominent factor in transdiagnostic theories of emotional problems, and it is included as an element in the research domain criteria. There is a plethora of risk scales across different domains, but most of these have notable shortcomings or are not suited for use in mental health research. The present study describes the development of the Risk Orientation Scale. Content was drawn from previous risk scales and separate classifications of risk. The factor structure of the ROS was derived in a clinically relevant sample and confirmed in two other independent non-clinical samples. The final 15-item ROS was found to have an adequate three-factor structure across clinical, general population and undergraduate student samples. Total and subscale scores covaried in the predicted direction with measures of risk taking behavior, underlying orientation towards reward and punishment, and clinical anxiety-relevant measures that have been theoretically linked to risk. The findings on the ROS thus support the idea that aversion to risk is a process that underlies anxiety disorders. The ROS can provide a brief and valid measure of this in both clinical and non-clinical populations. As it provides risk orientation towards specific domains, it can potentially aid in guiding clinicians in targeting important underlying mechanism in the treatment of anxiety disorders.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document