People tend to take more risks when deciding for others than for themselves. Results of three laboratory experiments (N = 398) suggest that this also applies to risk management decisions that protect from low-probability, high-consequence events, such as natural disasters. Participants bought a risk insurance contract and a building-strengthening intervention less frequently when they decided for another than when they decided for themselves in a game simulating a seismic risk. This self-other effect was strong when the probability of a disaster was low (4%), and the potential damage was high (a 50% reduction in value); however, it disappeared when the probability was higher (20%) and the potential damage lower (a 10% reduction in value) despite identical expected value. These results support the importance of the size of the potential damage in the triggering of the self-other effect. Our findings have practical implications in cases where risk management is under the control of a decision-maker, such as a manager or government, different from the final recipient. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved) © 2021 American Psychological Association
Self-other decision making and protective behavior under risk / Savadori, Lucia; Speranza, Elena. - In: JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE, PSYCHOLOGY, AND ECONOMICS. - ISSN 1937-321X. - 14:2(2021), pp. 115-130. [10.1037/npe0000139]
Self-other decision making and protective behavior under risk
Savadori, LuciaPrimo
;
2021-01-01
Abstract
People tend to take more risks when deciding for others than for themselves. Results of three laboratory experiments (N = 398) suggest that this also applies to risk management decisions that protect from low-probability, high-consequence events, such as natural disasters. Participants bought a risk insurance contract and a building-strengthening intervention less frequently when they decided for another than when they decided for themselves in a game simulating a seismic risk. This self-other effect was strong when the probability of a disaster was low (4%), and the potential damage was high (a 50% reduction in value); however, it disappeared when the probability was higher (20%) and the potential damage lower (a 10% reduction in value) despite identical expected value. These results support the importance of the size of the potential damage in the triggering of the self-other effect. Our findings have practical implications in cases where risk management is under the control of a decision-maker, such as a manager or government, different from the final recipient. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved) © 2021 American Psychological AssociationFile | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
salvadori.self.pdf
Solo gestori archivio
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (Publisher’s layout)
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione
853.72 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
853.72 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione