Who Takes Risks in High-Risk Sports? A Typological Personality Approach (original) (raw)
Related papers
Personality and Individual Differences, 2000
We predicted that four`Big Five' personality dimensionsÐOpenness, Agreeableness, Neuroticism, and ConscientiousnessÐwould be related to participants' responses to decisions in risky and cautious situations. Three hundred and ®ve students completed the NEO PI-R [Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI): professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources]. They then made self-other-, and ideal-judgments on risky and cautious dilemmas [Kogan, N. & Wallach, M. (1964). Risk-taking: a study in cognition and personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston]. People high in Openness made more extreme self-and ideal-judgments on risky dilemmas. People high in Agreeableness made more extreme, socially valued judgments across risky and cautious dilemmas. People high in Conscientiousness made more extreme ideal judgments on cautious dilemmas. People high in Neuroticism made more extreme ideal-judgments on risky dilemmas. These ®ndings suggest that personality in¯uences people's perceptions of risk and caution.
Comparing personality constructs of risk-taking behavior
Personality and Individual Differences, 1998
Canadian subjects "N 019# completed four psychological scales[ Three of the scales were directly related to risk!taking behavior[ These were the Sensation Seeking Scale "SSS V^Zuckerman\ 0868#\ the Tension Risk Adventure Inventory "TRAI^Keinan et al[\ 0873# and the Telic Dominance Scale "TDS^Murgatroyd et al[\ 0867#[ In addition\ subjects completed the Desire for Control Scale "DCS^Burger and Cooper\ 0868# to investigate the role of desire for control in risk!taking[ The results indicated "0# signi_cant di}erences between age and sensation seeking "1# a four!factor structure for the TRAI following factor analysis with this Canadian sample "2# numerous intra! and inter!scale relationships obtained from correlation analyses of and "3# four major dimensions arising from PCA of the four inventory scales[ Þ 0887 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved[
Personality and Individual Differences in Risk-taking
examines efforts to understand how individuals differ in risk taking / begin by outlining six conceptual approaches to studying risk taking / our review of research using these approaches finds evidence of both individual and situational differences in risk taking, i.e. understanding risk taking requires understanding both individual traits and risk-taking situations / organize our survey of individual differences in risk taking by situational categories, follow this with a look at several intersituational studies and what they find, and end with a general discussion and summary of these efforts personality characteristic or situation / risk as physical sensation / risk in games and lotteries / risk in everyday life experiences / risk in business and finance (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Personality and domain-specific risk taking
Journal of Risk Research, 2005
The concept of risk propensity has been the subject of both theoretical and empirical investigation, but with little consensus about its definition and measurement. To address this need, a new scale assessing overall risk propensity in terms of reported frequency of risk behaviours in six domains was developed and applied: recreation, health, career, finance, safety and social. The paper describes the properties of the scale and its correlates: demographic variables, biographical self-reports, and the NEO PI-R, a Five Factor personality inventory (N52041). There are three main results. First, risk propensity has clear links with age and sex, and with objective measures of career-related risk taking (changing jobs and setting up a business). Second, the data show risk propensity to be strongly rooted in personality. A clear Big Five pattern emerges for overall risk propensity, combining high extraversion and openness with low neuroticism, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. At the subscale level, sensation-seeking surfaces as a key important component of risk propensity. Third, risk propensity differs markedly in its distribution across job types and business sectors. These findings are interpreted as indicating that risk takers are of three nonexclusive types: stimulation seekers, goal achievers, and risk adapters. Only the first group is truly risk seeking, the others are more correctly viewed as risk bearers. The implications for risk research and management are discussed.
Journal of Risk Research , 2020
The article presents the results of an investigation where the main purpose was to see how willingness to take risks is distributed in the general adult population relative to socio-demographic background and personality. A representative sample (n = 1000) of the population 15 years and older was interviewed about socio-demographic background, personality type (Big Five, EPQ, Sensation Seeking) and willingness to take risks. We used a new scale containing eight dimensions, covering social, intellectual, achievement, political, economic, physical, ethical and existential types of risk. The results showed that people in general were risk averse in relation to physical, ethical, economic and existential risks but had a balanced bell-shaped distribution of scores on the other risk dimensions. There was a moderate to low positive correlation between all eight risk-taking dimensions except achievement risk versus ethical risk. Males were more willing to take risks than females on six of eight dimensions. Younger were more willing than older to take risks on all eight risk dimensions. Higher educational level influenced risk-taking positively in more than half of the dimensions, not only one’s own educational level but also father’s and even more mother’s educational level. There was a positive correlation with household income on three dimensions. All sensation seeking subscales and total sensation seeking correlated positively with all risk-taking dimensions. There were positive correlations with most risk-taking scales on EPQ’s Extraversion and Psychoticism and Big Five’s Extraversion, Stableness and Openness. Agreeableness and Conscientiousness had negative correlation with several risk-taking dimensions. A logistic regression model, identifying the 25 percent highest scorers on total risk-taking, found that being male and scoring high on sensation seeking were the most important predictors. Furthermore, high scores on the Big Five sub-scales Extraversion and Openness, as well as the Eysenck EPQ sub-scales Extraversion and Psychoticism predicted high willingness to take risks.
Personality Profile of Risk-Takers An Examination of the Big Five Facets
Journal of Individual Differences
Risk-taking is a long-standing area of inquiry among psychologists and economists. In this paper, we examine the personality profile of risk-takers in two independent samples. Specifically, we examined the association between the Big Five facets and risk-taking propensity across two measures: The Domain-Specific Risk-Taking Scale (DOSPERT) and the General Risk Propensity Scale (GRiPS). At the Big Five domain level, we found that extraversion and agreeableness were the primary predictors of risk-taking. However, facet-level analyses revealed that responsibility, a facet of conscientiousness, explained most of the total variance accounted for by the Big Five in both risk-taking measures. Based on our findings across two samples (n = 764), we find that the personality profile of a risk-taker is extraverted, open to experiences, disagreeable, emotionally stable, and irresponsible. Implications for the risk measurement are discussed.
Personality and Individual Differences, 2011
Previous research has demonstrated that various forms of risky behavior are highly associated among individuals, and such personality traits as impulsivity, sensation-seeking, and low self-control are correlated with risk-taking. However, little evidence indicates that self-report measures of personality traits associated with risky behavior significantly correlate with a behavioral preference for risk. We examined whether personality questionnaire measures of traits associated with risk (impulsivity, sensation-seeking, low ...
Taking Risks to Feel Excitement: Detailed Personality Profile and Genetic Associations
2021
This study mapped the personality and genetics of risky excitement-seekers focusing on skydiving behavior. We compared 298 skydivers to 298 demographically matched controls across the NEO Personality Inventory-3 domains, facets and 240 items. The most significant item-level effects were aggregated into a poly-item score of skydiving-associated personality markers (SPM; Study 1), where higher scores describe individuals who enjoy risky situations but have no self-control issues. The SPM score was associated with greater physical activity, higher rate of traumatic injuries and better mental health in a sample of 3,558 adults (Study 2). From genetic perspective, we associated skydiving behavior with 19 candidate variants that have previously been linked to excitement-seeking (Study 1). Polymorphisms in the SERT gene were the strongest predictors of skydiving, but the FDR-adjusted p-values were non-significant. In Study 2, we predicted SPM and E5: Excitement-seeking from risk-taking polygenic scores (PGS), using publicly available summary data from genome-wide association studies. While E5: Excitement-seeking was most strongly predicted by general risk tolerance and risky behaviors' PGSs, SPM was most strongly associated with the adventurousness PGS. Phenotypic and PGS associations suggest that skydiving is a specific perhaps more functionalform of excitement-seeking, which may nevertheless lead to physical injuries.
Not all risks are equal: the risk taking inventory for high-risk sports
Journal of sport & exercise psychology, 2013
Although high-risk sport participants are typically considered a homogenous risk-taking population, attitudes to risk within the high-risk domain can vary considerably. As no validated measure allows researchers to assess risk taking within this domain, we validated the Risk Taking Inventory (RTI) for high-risk sport across four studies. The RTI comprises seven items across two factors: deliberate risk taking and precautionary behaviors. In Study 1 (n = 341), the inventory was refined and tested via a confirmatory factor analysis used in an exploratory fashion. The subsequent three studies confirmed the RTI's good model-data fit via three further separate confirmatory factor analyses. In Study 2 (n = 518) and in Study 3 (n = 290), concurrent validity was also confirmed via associations with other related traits (sensation seeking, behavioral activation, behavioral inhibition, impulsivity, self-esteem, extraversion, and conscientiousness). In Study 4 (n = 365), predictive validit...
The Dark Factor of Personality and Risk-Taking
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2021
This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY