A Description–Experience Framework of the Psychology of Risk

Author:

Hertwig Ralph1ORCID,Wulff Dirk U.12

Affiliation:

1. Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany

2. Center for Cognitive and Decision Sciences, University of Basel

Abstract

The modern world holds countless risks for humanity, both large-scale and intimately personal—from cyberwarfare, pandemics, and climate change to sexually transmitted diseases and drug use and abuse. Many risks have prompted institutional, regulatory, and technological countermeasures, the success of which depends to some extent on how individuals learn about the risks in question. We distinguish between two powerful but imperfect teachers of risk. First, people may learn by consulting symbolic and descriptive material, such as warnings, statistics, and images. More often than not, however, a risk’s fluidity defies precise description. Second, people may learn about risks through personal experience. Responses to risk can differ systematically depending on whether people learn through one mode, both, or neither. One reason for these differences—and by no means the only reason—is the discrepancy in the cognitive impact that rare events (typically the risk event) and common events (typically the nonoccurrence of the risk event) have on the decision maker. We propose a description–experience framework that highlights not only the impact of each mode of learning but also the effects of their interplay on individuals’ and collectives’ responses to risk. We outline numerous research questions and themes suggested by this framework.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Psychology

Reference146 articles.

1. Abel M., Cole S., Zia B. (2021). Changing gambling behavior through experiential learning. The World Bank Economic Review, 35(3), 745–763. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/lhaa016

2. Allais M. (1953). Le comportement de l’homme rationnel devant le risque: Critique des postulats et axiomes de l’ecole Américaine [The behavior of rational man facing risk: Criticism of the postulates and axioms of the American School]. Econometrica, 21(4), 503–546. https://doi.org/10.2307/1907921

3. Andrews J. C. (2011). Warnings and disclosures. In Fischhoff B., Brewer N. T., Downs J. S. (Eds.), Communicating risks and benefits: An evidence-based user’s guide (pp. 149–161). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/media/81597/download

4. Argo J. J., Main K. J. (2004). Meta-analyses of the effectiveness of warning labels. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 23(2), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.23.2.193.51400

5. Arms Control Association. (2020, July). Chronology of U.S.North Korean nuclear and missile diplomacy. https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron

Cited by 17 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3