• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of risk research >An explanatory analysis of perceived risk decision weights (perceived-risk attitudes) and perceived benefit decision weights (perceived-benefit attitudes) in risk-value models
【24h】

An explanatory analysis of perceived risk decision weights (perceived-risk attitudes) and perceived benefit decision weights (perceived-benefit attitudes) in risk-value models

机译：感知风险决策权重（感知风险态度）和感知福利决策权重（感知 - 受益态度）的解释性分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

All decision making requires a trade-off between risks and values. While Markowitz defined risk as the variance of returns (thus reasoning that investors should consider it as undesirable), the more general risk-value framework allows risk to be defined as a person's subjective judgments. Psychological risk-return models go further, decomposing observed behavior (risk taking) into two processes: (1) a judgment of benefits and risks and (2) a trade-off between perceived benefits and perceived risks, with a person-specific willingness to trade-off units of returns (benefits) for units of risk, conceptualized as attitude toward perceived risk (PRA) and attitude toward perceived benefits (PBA). PRA and PBA describe the degree to which people find perceived risks and benefits attractive, all other things being equal, and are assumed to be relatively stable across situations and domains. We test this assumption in an empirical study, checking the temporal stability of PRA and PBA (using the a Domain-Specific Risk-Taking [DOSPERT] scale ) and the cross-task stability of PBA (performing comparisons between the DOSPERT and the Columbia Card Task[CCT]). Finally, we explain both PRA and PBA using the Big Five personality dimensions and Stimulating-Instrumental Risk Inventory (SIRI), showing that PBA weights increase with openness to experience, while the negative effect of perceived risk on risk taking (PRA) increases with conscientiousness and decreases with stimulating risk taking. The results show that PBA and PRA can be treated as traits which, in some instances at least, are stable across time and tasks, and which can be partially explained by personality, providing a link to the idea of a personality dependent 'ideal point' for risk preference.
机译：所有决策都需要在风险和价值之间进行权衡。虽然Markowitz定义了风险作为回报的差异（因此，投资者应该认为这应该是不合需要的），但更一般的风险价值框架允许风险被定义为一个人的主观判断。心理风险返回模型进一步进一步，将观察到的行为（风险采取）分解为两种流程：（1）对福利和风险的判断和（2）在感知福利和感知风险之间进行权衡，具有特定于个人的意愿有关风险单位的回报（福利）的权衡单位，概念化为对感知风险（PRA）和对感知福利的态度（PBA）的态度。 PRA和PBA描述了人们发现所感知的风险和益处吸引力的程度，所有其他东西都是平等的，并且被认为是跨情节和域的相对稳定的程度。我们在实证研究中测试这一假设，检查PRA和PBA的时间稳定性（使用域特定的风险[Dospert] Scale）和PBA的交叉任务稳定性（在Dospert和哥伦比亚卡之间进行比较任务[cct]）。最后，我们使用大五个人格尺寸和刺激器官风险库存（SIRI）来解释PRA和PBA，表明PBA重量随着经验的开放而增加，而感知风险的风险（PRA）的负面影响随着劣征而增加并随着刺激风险服用而减少。结果表明，PBA和PRA可以被视为特征，在某些情况下至少在某些情况下跨越时间和任务稳定，并且可以通过个性部分解释，提供与人格依赖的“理想点”的想法的联系风险偏好。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号