Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Nov 21:9:2307.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02307. eCollection 2018.

Can We Infer Inter-Individual Differences in Risk-Taking From Behavioral Tasks?

Affiliations
Review

Can We Infer Inter-Individual Differences in Risk-Taking From Behavioral Tasks?

Stefano Palminteri et al. Front Psychol. .

Abstract

Investigating the bases of inter-individual differences in risk-taking is necessary to refine our cognitive and neural models of decision-making and to ultimately counter risky behaviors in real-life policy settings. However, recent evidence suggests that behavioral tasks fare poorly compared to standard questionnaires to measure individual differences in risk-taking. Crucially, using model-based measures of risk taking does not seem to improve reliability. Here, we put forward two possible - not mutually exclusive - explanations for these results and suggest future avenues of research to improve the assessment of inter-individual differences in risk-taking by combining repeated online testing and mechanistic computational models.

Keywords: behavioral economics; behavioral phenotype; correlational psychology; inter-individual variability; risk-taking.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
The figure schematizes how low consistency of behavioral measures of risk may arise from the multi-layer model. At the top, we represent the different factors that influence the probability to express a given behavioral phenotype at a given time point in addition to random error. We consider a simplified case in which only two phenotypes are possible: red (risk seeking) and blue (risk aversion). The different layers change at different time constants (as exemplified by the gray triangle on the right). At a given time point (t) the momentary risk attitude is the weighted sum of the different layers of influence plus random error. A given subject is tested in two experimental sessions (ES1, and ES2) with two behavioral tasks supposed to measure the same behavioral phenotype (T1 and T2). The multi-layer model may explain why behavioral measures are not consistent between-tasks and between-sessions.

References

    1. Attanasi A., Georgantzís N., Rotondi V., Vigani D. (2018). Lottery- and survey-based risk attitudes linked through a multichoice elicitation task. Theory Decis. 84 341–372. 10.1007/s11238-017-9613-0 - DOI
    1. Corsetto P., Filippin A. (2013). A theoretical and experimental appraisal of five risk elicitation methods. SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 547, Berlin: 10.2139/ssrn.2253819 - DOI
    1. Edwards A. L. (1953). The relationship between the judged desirability of a trait and the probability that the trait will be endorsed. J. Appl. Psychol. 37 90–93. 10.1037/h0058073 - DOI
    1. Enkavi A., Eisenberg L., Bissett P., Mazza G. L., Mackinnon D. P., Marsch L. A., et al. (2018). A large-scale analysis of test-retest reliabilities of self-regulation measures. PsyArXiv [Preprint]. 10.31234/osf.io/x5pm4 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Erev I., Ert D., Plonsky O., Cohen D., Cohen O. (2017). From anomalies to forecasts: toward a descriptive model of decisions under risk, under ambiguity, and from experience. Psychol. Rev. 124 369–409. 10.1037/rev0000062 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources