A theory of perceived risk and attractiveness

Elke U. Weber, Carolyn J. Anderson, Michael H. Birnbaum

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

People judged both the attractiveness and risk of lotteries to win or lose money. The lotteries were designed to test whether risk and attractiveness judgments show systematic deviations from the simple sum of probability-by-utility-products analogous to (S)EU theory. Our results led to an alternative combination rule for probability and outcome information, with a relative weight averaging component and a configural (i.e., sign- or rank-dependent) probability weighting component. Ratings of risk and attractiveness were negatively correlated, but the two tasks showed systematic differences in the rank order of judgments. Both judgments could be fit by the same configural relative weight averaging model, but with different parameters (especially the sign-dependent probability weighting functions). Risk judgments were more sensitive to the probability of losses and zero outcomes compared to attractiveness judgments, which were more sensitive to the probability of gains. There were individual differences on the extent of this difference in probability weights between risk and attractiveness judgments.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)492-523
Number of pages32
JournalOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
Volume52
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1992

Fingerprint

Weights and Measures
Perceived risk
Attractiveness
Individuality
Lottery
Relative weight
Probability weighting
Deviation
Probability weighting function
Individual differences
Rating
Model averaging

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Psychology
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Cite this

A theory of perceived risk and attractiveness. / Weber, Elke U.; Anderson, Carolyn J.; Birnbaum, Michael H.

In: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 52, No. 3, 08.1992, p. 492-523.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Weber, Elke U. ; Anderson, Carolyn J. ; Birnbaum, Michael H. / A theory of perceived risk and attractiveness. In: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1992 ; Vol. 52, No. 3. pp. 492-523.
@article{12d4425919504343851100ea839c9ba1,
title = "A theory of perceived risk and attractiveness",
abstract = "People judged both the attractiveness and risk of lotteries to win or lose money. The lotteries were designed to test whether risk and attractiveness judgments show systematic deviations from the simple sum of probability-by-utility-products analogous to (S)EU theory. Our results led to an alternative combination rule for probability and outcome information, with a relative weight averaging component and a configural (i.e., sign- or rank-dependent) probability weighting component. Ratings of risk and attractiveness were negatively correlated, but the two tasks showed systematic differences in the rank order of judgments. Both judgments could be fit by the same configural relative weight averaging model, but with different parameters (especially the sign-dependent probability weighting functions). Risk judgments were more sensitive to the probability of losses and zero outcomes compared to attractiveness judgments, which were more sensitive to the probability of gains. There were individual differences on the extent of this difference in probability weights between risk and attractiveness judgments.",
author = "Weber, {Elke U.} and Anderson, {Carolyn J.} and Birnbaum, {Michael H.}",
year = "1992",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/0749-5978(92)90030-B",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "52",
pages = "492--523",
journal = "Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes",
issn = "0749-5978",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A theory of perceived risk and attractiveness

AU - Weber, Elke U.

AU - Anderson, Carolyn J.

AU - Birnbaum, Michael H.

PY - 1992/8

Y1 - 1992/8

N2 - People judged both the attractiveness and risk of lotteries to win or lose money. The lotteries were designed to test whether risk and attractiveness judgments show systematic deviations from the simple sum of probability-by-utility-products analogous to (S)EU theory. Our results led to an alternative combination rule for probability and outcome information, with a relative weight averaging component and a configural (i.e., sign- or rank-dependent) probability weighting component. Ratings of risk and attractiveness were negatively correlated, but the two tasks showed systematic differences in the rank order of judgments. Both judgments could be fit by the same configural relative weight averaging model, but with different parameters (especially the sign-dependent probability weighting functions). Risk judgments were more sensitive to the probability of losses and zero outcomes compared to attractiveness judgments, which were more sensitive to the probability of gains. There were individual differences on the extent of this difference in probability weights between risk and attractiveness judgments.

AB - People judged both the attractiveness and risk of lotteries to win or lose money. The lotteries were designed to test whether risk and attractiveness judgments show systematic deviations from the simple sum of probability-by-utility-products analogous to (S)EU theory. Our results led to an alternative combination rule for probability and outcome information, with a relative weight averaging component and a configural (i.e., sign- or rank-dependent) probability weighting component. Ratings of risk and attractiveness were negatively correlated, but the two tasks showed systematic differences in the rank order of judgments. Both judgments could be fit by the same configural relative weight averaging model, but with different parameters (especially the sign-dependent probability weighting functions). Risk judgments were more sensitive to the probability of losses and zero outcomes compared to attractiveness judgments, which were more sensitive to the probability of gains. There were individual differences on the extent of this difference in probability weights between risk and attractiveness judgments.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=38249009867&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=38249009867&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0749-5978(92)90030-B

DO - 10.1016/0749-5978(92)90030-B

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:38249009867

VL - 52

SP - 492

EP - 523

JO - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

JF - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

SN - 0749-5978

IS - 3

ER -