The Psychological Drivers of Self-Reported Risk Preference

Autor/in	Rolison, Jonathan J.
Titel	The Psychological Drivers of Self-Reported Risk Preference
Quelle	In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 49 (2023) 10, S.1635-1661 (27 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Rolison, Jonathan J.)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0278-7393
DOI	10.1037/xlm0001266
Schlagwörter	Risk; Psychological Patterns; Preferences; Psychological Characteristics; Influences; Evaluation; Cognitive Processes + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Risiko; Influence; Einfluss; Einflussfaktor; Evaluierung; Cognitive process; Kognitiver Prozess
Abstract	Why are some people more willing than others to take risks? While behavioral tasks (e.g., monetary lotteries) are often regarded as a gold standard for capturing a person's risk preference, recent studies have found stated preferences (e.g., responses to hypothetical scenarios) to exhibit higher reliability, convergent validity, and test-retest stability. Yet, little is known about the psychological drivers of stated preferences. Central to the stated preference approach, the psychological risk-return model conceptualizes a person's propensity to engage in an activity or behavior as a tradeoff between their risk perceptions and expected benefits. To cast a light on the psychological drivers of risk preference within the psychological risk-return framework, in a series of studies participants reported how they evaluated the risks and benefits of activities and their propensity to engage. Individual differences in analytic and intuitive thinking dispositions were also measured. Some participants referred explicitly to risks and rewards of activities when deriving their risk propensity, which was associated with sensitivity to their risk perception and expected benefit ratings. Associations with thinking dispositions indicated that participants who considered risks and rewards were more disposed to analytic thinking. Participants' reports also revealed a broad repertoire of psychological drivers (e.g., intuition, imagination, and feeling) of their evaluations of activities. These were stable over time, associated with thinking dispositions, and influenced their risk preference. The findings provide support for the psychological risk-return model of risk preference. A multifaceted model of preference is urged by the findings to acknowledge the multiple co-occurring psychological drivers of risk preference. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01