Risky Decisions: Active Risk Management (original) (raw)
2012, Current Directions in Psychological Science
De c is io ns : Ac tive Ris k Manage me nt Os wald Hube r Manus cript acce pte d ve rsion ris k-de fusing ope rator R DO in addition 2 Decision behavior with realistic risky scenarios is quite different from that in choices between gambles: Decision makers are less interested in probability information. Instead, they often attempt to actively manipulate the risk in an otherwise attractive alternative: A ( ) is an action intended by the decision maker to be performed to a specific existing alternative, and it is expected to decrease the risk (e.g., vaccination, insurance). The search for an RDO and the incorporation of a detected RDO into the alternative cannot be modeled with classical decision theories or heuristics. The paper presents Risk Management Decision Theory that describes the decision process with and without RDOs, and gives an overview about experimental research with RDOs. The consequences of the RDO concept for theories of decision behaviour are discussed. Abs trac t 13 1
Sign up for access to the world's latest research.
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
Behavior in risky decisions: Focus on risk defusing
In experiments on risky decisions with gambles as alternatives the central factors determining decision behaviour are: The subjective values of the outcomes, and their subjective probability. The present paper first reports results of a number of experiments indicating that this central result cannot be generalized. In quasi-realistic risky scenarios, many decision makers are not interested in probability information and many search actively for risk-defusing operators (RDOs). An RDO is an action intended by the decision maker to be performed additionally to a specific alternative in order to decrease the risk. The paper also gives an overview about experimental research with RDOs. Topics include the factors that determine the search for RDOs and the factors affecting the acceptance of an RDO. Finding an acceptable RDO has a distinct effect on choice: If for a specific risky alternative an RDO is available, this alternative is chosen most often. The consequences of the concept of RDOs on theories about decision behaviour and on aiding decision making are discussed.
What Do We Know About Decision Making Under Risk and
1994
This article reviews two major approached used in the past for risk analysis�the expected utility approach and the use of safety rules�and endeavors to reconcile their applicability and use in light of the recent nonexpected utility risk literature and working using the mean-Gini coefficient for risk analysis. This leads to the identification of several �"reduced form�" hypotheses that hold under
Decision-making in Risk Management
Perspectives on Risk, Assessment and Management Paradigms [Working Title]
The definition of risk introduced in the ISO 31000 standard of 2009 (2018) is uncertain goal achievement; thus, both negative and positive outcomes can be considered. It also implies that risk is not limited to life and health, but may cover all goals of a company. Risk management thus becomes a question of achieving and optimizing multiple goals. Since safety is but one of several considerations, safety may lose out to other more easily measured objectives of a company, such as economics and compliance with regulatory requirements. Risk analyses have a long history of quantification, a tradition that for various reasons has waned and should be revived if safety goals are to be treated together with other goals of a company. The extended scope affects not only company owners and employees but also neighbors, the local community, and the society at large. The stochastic nature of risk and the considerable time lap between decisions and the multiattributed consequences implies that managing risk is exposed to cognitive biases of many sorts. Risk management should be based on a quantitative approach to risk analysis as a protection against the many cognitive biases likely to be present, and managers should be trained to recognize the most common cognitive biases and decision pitfalls.
Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making, 2004
Most decisions, whether choices to purchase flood insurance, invest overseas, pursue an experimental medical treatment, or steal a base, involve risk. Purchasing insurance is sensible if you believe a flood will happen, but a bad idea if you are convinced it won't. The study of risky decision making has addressed two broad questions. How should individuals behave when faced with a risky choice like the ones above? How do individuals behave when faced with a risky choice? The first question is normative; the second, descriptive. 1 Although the first question is clearly important, our aim in this chapter is to provide answers to the second question. 1 A third category of study is prescriptive: how can we get ordinary people to act more normatively? This particular question motivates decision analysis (e.g., Raiffa, 1968). Many decision analysts see the divergence between descriptive and normative models as an argument why prescription is needed (e.g., Bell, Raiffa, & Tversky, 1988). 2 The list of Nobel Prize winners in Economics who have contributed directly to the study of decision under risk is remarkable and includes
Support of decision-making under risk by a risk-averse decision-maker
Decision Making in Manufacturing and Services, 2020
The paper presents the decision support under risk by the risk averse decision maker. Decision making under risk occurs when the result of the decision is not unequivocal and depends on the state of the environment. The decision making process is modeled with the use of multi-criteria optimization. The decision is made by solving the problem with the control parameters that determine the decision maker's aspirations and the evaluation of the solutions received. The decision maker asks the parameter for which the solution is determined. Then, evaluate the solution received accepting or rejecting it. In the second case, the decision maker gives a new parameter value and the problem is solved again for the new parameter. The work includes an simple discrete problem of decision support under risk
Decision Making Under Risk: A Prescriptive Approach
2009
Abstract This article takes the form of a research proposal. The paper seeks to address the problem faced by investors of how best to deal with decision making under risk. The methodology utilizes a normative model from economics—expected utility theory—and a descriptive model from psychology—prospect theory—to formulate a rational but realistic compromise between the two: a prescriptive model of risk preferences.
Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2011
In three experiments the problem is investigated how people identify early in the decision process those alternatives that are worthwhile to be examined in more detail. We assume that decision makers employ the Advantages first Principle: They first search for information about positive outcomes and then focus their information search (e.g., for negative consequences or for risk defusing operators) on those alternatives that appear attractive after this initial evaluation. In Experiment 1 (120 participants), initial information about consequences was varied for eight alternatives (no information, positive consequences, negative, or mixed for four alternatives). In all conditions, the great majority of participants followed both aspects of the Advantages first Principle. In Experiment 2, 60 participants decided in two quasi-realistic scenarios with two alternatives each. Initial information was presented so that one alternative had better positive consequences, worse negative consequences, or both. In all conditions, more information was searched for in the initially better alternative. In Experiment 3 (20 participants) the Advantages first Principle was not only confirmed for a scenario but also for choices in traditional gambling tasks with two and eight alternatives, respectively. Participants could win or lose real money. a summary of experimental results concerning factors influencing the search for RDOs and the factors affecting the acceptance of an RDO (e.g., costs of applying an RDO, size of its effect). Low interest in probabilities and search for RDOs were also found in a study investigating real decisions in the context of genetic counseling by . O. Huber and O. W. Huber (2008) directly compared information search in gambles and quasi-realistic scenarios. They obtained different search patterns, with those for gambles incorporating search for outcomes and probabilities, whereas in quasi-realistic scenarios participants predominantly searched for outcomes and RDOs. 2 Consider, for example, the situation of a businesswoman who is confronted with two options: She can travel into a country where an epidemic disease rages in order to negotiate an important contract, or she can postpone the meeting with the risk of failing to sign a satisfying contract . The businesswoman may inquire whether a vaccination exists or may look for possibilities to prevent an infection (e.g., by cooking water before drinking it). These additional actions are RDOs. RDOs are quite common in everyday risky decision situations. Typical examples are: If a person considers driving by car in a region where many cars are stolen, taking out car theft insurance is an RDO, or if a person considers sending important documents by mail and fears they could get lost, he or she can make a copy of the documents as an RDO. Different types of RDOs are distinguished in Note: The first number indicates the means across all eight alternatives. The number in parentheses displays means for those alternatives for which no information was presented initially. For example, if one participant in the no information condition in the maki scenario had started with search for negative consequences for two alternatives and for positive consequences for six alternatives, the respective numbers would be 0.25 for negative consequences, and 0.75 for positive consequences, respectively.
Is There a Plausible Theory for Decision under Risk?
Experimental Economics Center Working Paper, 2008
Theories of decision under risk that model risk averse behavior with decreasing marginal utility of money have previously been critiqued with calibration analyses. This paper introduces a dual calibration critique that applies to decision theories that represent risk aversion with nonlinear transformation of probabilities or nonlinear transformation of payoffs or both types of transformations. The dual calibration critique makes clear how plausibility problems with theories of decision under risk are fundamental. Testable calibration ...
Risk ManagementManaging Risks, not Calculating Them
Risk and Insurance, 2004
The expected utility approach to decision making advocates a probability vision of the world and labels any deviation from it 'irrational'. This paper reconsiders the rationality argument and argues that calculating risks is not a viable strategy in an uncertain world. Alternative strategies not only can save considerable cognitive and computational resources, but are more 'rational' with view to the restricted definition of rationality applied by expected utility theorists. The alternative decision making model of risk management is presented and explained.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.