Predicting Risk Sensitivity in Humans and Lower Animals: Risk as Variance or Coefficient of Variation

Psychological Review

Volumn 111, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 430-445

  Weber, Elke U ^a,d   Shafir, Sharoni ^b   Blais, Ann Renée ^c  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

^b HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

^c DEFENCE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CANADA   (Canada)

^d The Sanford C Bernstein Co Center for Leadership and Ethics   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; DECISION MAKING; HIGH RISK BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ANIMALS; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; RISK-TAKING;

EID: 1942443226     PISSN: 0033295X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.430     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. Abacus Technology Corporation. (1996). Probabilistic risk analysis for turnkey construction: A case study (Final Report FTA-MD-26-7001-96-2). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation.
2. Bateson, M., & Kacelnik, A. (1995). Accuracy of memory for amount in the foraging of starlings, sturnus vulgaris. Animal Behaviour, 50, 431-443.
3. Battalio, R. C., Kagel, J. H., & Jiranyakul, K. (1990). Testing between alternative models of choice under uncertainty: Some initial results. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 3, 25-50.
4. Bell, D. E. (1995). Risk, return, and utility. Management Science, 41, 23-30.
5. Bontempo, R. N., Bottom, W. P., & Weber, E. U. (1997). Cross-cultural differences in risk perception: A model-based approach. Risk Analysis, 17, 479-488.
6. Busemeyer, J. R., & Myung, I. J. (1992). An adaptive approach to human decision making: Learning theory, decision theory, and human performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 177-194.
7. Busemeyer, J., & Townsend, J. T. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamic cognition approach to decision making, Psychological Review, 100, 432-459.
8. Bush, R. R., & Mosteller, F. (1955). Stochastic models for learning. New York: Wiley.
9. Camerer, C. F., & Ho, T. (1999). Experience-weighted attraction in games. Econometrica, 64, 827-874.
10. Caraco, T. (1980). On foraging time allocation in a stochastic environment. Ecology, 61, 119-128.
11. Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford.
12. Champernowne, D. G. (1953). A model of income distribution. Economic Journal, 63, 318.
13. Commons, M. L., Herrnstein, R. J., & Rachlin, H. (1982). Quantitative analysis of behavior: Vol. 2. Matching and maximizing accounts, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
14. Crowther, J., & Barker, P. (1995). Magnetic susceptibility: Distinguishing anthopogenic effects from the natural. Archaeological Prospection, 2, 207-215.
15. Dyer, J. S., & Jia, J. (1997). Relative risk-value models. European Journal of Operational Research, 103, 170-185.
16. Estes, W. K. (1959). The statistical approach to learning. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science (Vol. 2, pp. 380-491). New York: McGraw-Hill.
17. Fagley, N. S., & Miller P. M. (1987). The effects of decision framing on choice of risky vs. certain options. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 264-277.
18. Fagley, N. S., & Miller P. M. (1990). The effect of framing on choice: Interactions with risk taking propensity, cognitive style, and sex. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 496-510.
19. Gallistel, C. R., & Gelman, R. (1992). Preverbal and verbal counting and computation. Cognition, 44, 43-74.
20. Gibbon, J. (1977). Scalar expectancy theory and Weber's law in animal timing. Psychological Review, 84, 279-335.
21. Gibbon, J. R., Church, R. M., Fairhurst, S., & Kacelnik, A. (1988). Scalar expectancy theory and choice between delayed rewards. Psychological Review, 95, 102-114.
22. Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychological Review, 102, 684-704.
23. Gonzalez-Vallejo, C. (2002). Making trade-offs: A probabilistic and context-sensitive model of choice behavior. Psychological Review, 109, 137-155.
24. Gunther, J. W., & Robinson, K. J. (1999). Industry mix and leading environmental variability: What does the average bank face? Economic and Financial Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, 2, 24-31.
25. Hammer, M., & Menzel, R. (1995). Learning and memory in the honeybee. The Journal of Neuroscience, 15, 1617-1630.
26. Hertwig, R., Barron, G., Weber, E. U., & Erev, I. (in press). Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events. Psychological Science.
27. Highhouse, S., & Paese, P. W. (1996). Problem domain and prospect frame: Choice under opportunity versus threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 124-132.
28. Highhouse, S., & Yuce, P. (1996). Perspectives, perceptions, and risk taking behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 159-167.
29. Hilborn, R., & Mangel, M. (1997). The ecological detective: Confronting models with data. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
30. Hsee, C. K., & Weber, E. U. (1997). A fundamental prediction error: Self-others discrepancies in risk preference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 45-53.
31. Jia, J., & Dyer, J. S. (1997). Risk-value theory (Working Paper 94/95-3-4). Graduate School of Business, University of Texas at Austin.
32. Johnson, O. S., Williams, J. R., Gwin, R. E., & Mikesell, C. L. (1986). Economic analysis of reduced tillage wheat and grain sorghum rotations in Western Kansas (Bulletin 650). Agricultural Experiment Station, Kansas State University.
33. Kacelnik, A., & Bateson, M. (1996). Risky theories - The effects of variance on foraging decisions. American Zoologist, 36, 402-434.
34. Kacelnik, A., & Bateson, M. (1998). Risk-sensitivity: Crossroads for theories of decision-making. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1, 304-309.
35. Kacelnik, A., & Brito e Abreu, F. (1998). Risky choice and Weber's law. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 194, 289-298.
36. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-283.
37. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341-350.
38. Laughhunn, D., & Payne, J. W. (1984). The impact of sunk outcomes on risky choice behaviour. Canadian Journal of Operational Research and Information Processing, 22, 155-181.
39. Leclerc, F., Schmitt, B. H., & Dubé, L. (1995). Waiting time and decision making: Is time like money? Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 110-119.
40. Loomes, G., Starmer, C., & Sugden, R. (1989). Preference reversal: Information-processing effect or rational non-transitive choice? The Economic Journal, 99, 140-151.
41. Lopes, L. L., & Oden, G. C. (1998). The role of aspiration level in risky choice. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 42, 478-488.
42. Luce, R. D. (1959). Individual choice behavior. New York: Wiley.
43. Luce, R. D., & Weber, E. U. (1986). An axiomatic theory of conjoint, expected risk. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 30, 188-205.
44. Mandelbrot, B. (1953). An informational theory of the statistical structure of language. In W. Jackson (Ed.), Communication theory (pp. 486-502). New York: Buttersworth.
45. Markowitz, H. M. (1959). Portfolio selection. New York: Wiley.
46. March, J. G. (1996). Learning to be risk-averse. Psychological Review, 103, 309-319.
47. Marsh, B., & Kacelnik, A. (2002). Framing effects and risky decisions in starlings. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 99, 3352-3355.
48. Montague, P. R., Dayan, P., Person, C., & Sejnowski, T. J. (1995, October 26). Bee foraging in uncertain environments using predictive hebbian learning. Nature, 377, 725-728.
49. Musser, W. N., & Patrick, G. F. (1995). Farmers and prospect theory: Some reliability concerns (Working Paper No. 95-02). College Park, MD: University of Maryland, Agriculture and Resource Economics Department.
50. Petanidou, T., & Smets, E. (1995). The potential of marginal lands for bees and apiculture: Nectar secretion in Mediterranean shrublands. Apidologie, 26, 39-52.
51. Rabin, M. (2000). Risk aversion and expected-utility theory: A calibration theorem, Econometrica, 68, 1281-1292.
52. Rajgopal, S., & Shevlin, T. (2000). Stock option compensation and risk taking: The case of oil and gas producers (Working paper). Department of Accounting, University of Washington.
53. Real, L. A. (1996). Paradox, performance, and the architecture of decision-making in animals. American Zoologist, 36, 518-529.
54. Rector, J. (1995). "Variability happens": Basic descriptive statistics for volunteer programs. The Volunteer Monitor, 7, 1-8.
55. Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley.
56. Schneider, S. L. (1992). Framing and conflict: Aspiration level contingency, the status quo, and current theories of risky choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 1040-1057.
57. Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1990). Are risk-attitudes related across domain and response modes? Management Science, 36, 1451-1463.
58. Shafir, S. (1994). Intransitivity of preferences in honey bees: Support for "comparative" evaluation of foraging options. Animal Behaviour, 48, 55-67.
59. Shafir, S. (2000). Risk-sensitive foraging: The effect of relative variability. Oikos, 88, 663-669.
60. Shafir, S., Bechar, A., & Weber, E. U. (2003). Cognition-mediated coevolution: Context-dependent evaluations and sensitivity of pollinators to variability in nectar rewards. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 238, 195-209.
61. Shafir, S., Wiegmann, D., Smith, B. H., & Real, L. A. (1999). Risk-sensitive foraging: Choice behavior of honey bees in response to variability in volume of reward. Animal Behaviour, 57, 1055-1061.
62. Sharpe, W. (1964). Capital asset prices: A theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. Journal of Finance, 19, 425.
63. Simon, H. A. (1955). On a class of skew distribution functions. Biometrika, 42, 425-440.
64. Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 3-22.
65. Stephens, D. W. (1981). The logic of risk-sensitive foraging preferences. Animal Behaviour, 29, 628-629.
66. Takemura, K. (1993). The effect of decision frame and decision justification on risky choice. Japanese Psychological Research, 35, 36-40.
67. Takemura, K. (1994). Influence of elaboration on the framing of decision. Journal of Psychology, 128, 33-39.
68. Thaler, R. (1980). Toward a theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organizations, 1, 39-60.
69. Thaler, R. H., & Johnson, E. J. (1990). Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: The effects of prior outcomes on risky choice. Management Science, 36, 643-660.
70. Thorndike, E. L. (1898). Animal intelligence: An experimental study of the associative processes in animals. Psychological Review Monographs Supplement, 2(4, Whole No. 8).
71. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.
72. van Schie, E. C. M., & van der Plight, J. (1990). Problem representation, frame reference, and risky choice. Acta Psychologica, 75, 243-259.
73. von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behavior (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
74. Wang, X. T. (1996). Framing effects: Dynamics and task domains. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66, 145-147.
75. Wang, X. T., & Johnston, V. S. (1995). Perceived social context and risk preference: A re-examination of framing effects in a life-death decision problem. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 8, 279-293.
76. Weber, E. H. (1978). De subtilitate tactus [The sense of touch] (H. E. Ross & D. H. Murray, Eds.; H. E. Ross, Trans.). London: Academic Press. (Original work published 1834)
77. Weber, E. U. (1988). A descriptive measure of risk. Acta Psychologica, 69, 185-203.
78. Weber, E. U. (1999). Who's afraid of a little risk? New evidence for general risk aversion. In J. Shanteau, B. A. Mellers, & D. Schum (Eds.), Decision science and technology: Reflections on the contributions of Ward Edwards (pp. 53-64). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Press.
79. Weber, E. U., & Hsee, C. K. (1999). Models and mosaics: Investigating cross-cultural differences in risk perception and risk preference. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 611-617.
80. Weber, E. U., & Milliman, R. (1997). Perceived risk attitudes: Relating risk perception to risky choice. Management Science, 43, 122-143.
81. Wennberg, J., & Wennberg, D. (2000). Dartmouth atlas of healthcare in Michigan. Detroit, MI: Trustees of Dartmouth College.
82. Williams, B. A. (1988). Reinforcement, choice, and response strength. In R. C. Atkinson, R. J. Herrnstein, G. Lindzey, & R. D. Luce (Eds.), Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 167-244). New York: Wiley.
83. Windschitl, P. D., & Weber, E. U. (1999). The interpretation of "likely" depends on context, but "70%" is 70%, right? The influence of associative processes on perceived certainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1514-1533.
84. Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human behavior and the principle of least effort. Boston: Addison-Wesley Press.