Testing Question Order Effects of Self-Perception of Risk Propensity on Simple Lottery Choices as Measures of the Actual Risk Propensity

• Authors: Golik Jakub
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Uncertainty together with the necessity of making choices inevitably results in risky decisions. For many years now, scientists have been studying notions connected with risk such as risk management, risk perception or risk propensity. While many sophisticated methods regarding measurement of risk propensity have been developed so far, it seems that little attention has been paid to checking whether they are not inherently flawed. The main goal of this article is to check with a simple preliminary study whether questionnaire based methods of risk propensity assessment are not susceptible to question order effects. The research is focused on respondents’ answers to simple lottery choices as measures of their risk propensity. However, what would happen if the respondents were first asked how they perceive their own risk propensity? In order to answer this query a few questions designed to measure risk propensity and self-perception of risk propensity have been interspersed in a questionnaire of another research project. Furthermore, as an additional output of the study, the correlation has been checked between self-perception of risk propensity and the actual assessment of risk propensity based on the questions used. The results of the study show that question order effects are partially present in the setting described. Some conclusions and recommendations for further research are made based on the results. Finally, it can be concluded from the research that simple self-perception of risk propensity was significantly correlated with measures of actual risk propensity used.

Keywords

EN

order effects; questions order; risk propensity; risk perception; simple lottery

• Publisher: Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, Polish Academy of Sciences
• Journal: ASK. Research and Methods
• Year: 2018
• Volume: 27
• Pages: 41-60

Dates

published

2018

Contributors

author

Golik Jakub

• Faculty of Management and Economics, Gdańsk University of Technology

References

• Aklin, Will M., C. W. Lejuez, Michael J. Zvolensky, Chris W. Kahler, and Marya Gwadz. 2005. “Evaluation of Behavioral Measures of Risk Taking Propensity with Inner City Adolescents.” Behaviour Research and Therapy 43(2):215–28. Retrieved (http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0005796704000427). Baird, Inga Skromme and Howard Thomas. 1985. “Toward a Contingency Model of Strategic Risk Taking.” The Academy of Management Review 10(2):230–43. Retrieved January 7, 2018 (http://www.jstor.org/stable/257965?origin=crossref). Bettman, James R. 1973. “Perceived Risk and Its Components: A Model and Empirical Test.” Journal of Marketing Research 10(2):184. Retrieved January 7, 2018 (http://www.jstor.org/stable/3149824?origin=crossref). Börjesson, M., J. Österberg, and A. Enander. 2015. “Risk Propensity within the Military: A Study of Swedish Officers and Soldiers.” Journal of Risk Research 18(1):55–68. Coppola, Michela. 2014. “Eliciting Risk-Preferences in Socio-Economic Surveys: How Do Different Measures Perform?” The Journal of Socio-Economics 48(February 2014):1–10. Retrieved (http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1053535713001376). Densberger, Kathryn. 2014. “The Self-Efficacy and Risk-Propensity of Entrepreneurs.” Journal of Enterprising Culture 22(4):437–62. Retrieved November 28, 2016 (http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/10.1142/S0218495814500186). Golik, Jakub. 2016. “Expected Utility Hypothesis - Its Origin and Development.” Gdańsk University of Technology. Retrieved (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311424252_Expected_Utility_Hypothesis_-_its_origin_and_development). Harrison, James D., Jane M. Young, Phyllis Butow, Glenn Salkeld, and Michael J. Solomon. 2005. “Is It Worth the Risk? A Systematic Review of Instruments That Measure Risk Propensity for Use in the Health Setting.” Social Science & Medicine 60(6):1385–96. Retrieved (http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0277953604003508). Horcajo, Javier, Víctor J. Rubio, David Aguado, José Manuel Hernández, and M. Oliva Márquez. 2014. “Using the Implicit Association Test to Assess Risk Propensity Self-Concept: Analysis of Its Predictive Validity on a Risk-Taking Behaviour in a Natural Setting.” European Journal of Personality 28(5):459–71. Retrieved (http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/per.1925). Hung, Kuo-Ting and Chanchai Tangpong. 2010. “General Risk Propensity in Multifaceted Business Decisions: Scale Development*.” Journal of Managerial Issues 22(1):7-8,88-106. Retrieved (http://search.proquest.com/docview/89213990?accountid=10297%5Cnhttp://sfx.cranfield.ac.uk/cranfield?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&genre=article&sid=ProQ:ProQ:abiglobal&atitle=General+Risk+Propensity+in+Multifaceted+Business+). Jackson, Douglas N., Larry Hourany, and Neil J. Vidmar. 1972. “A Four-Dimensional Interpretation of Risk Taking1.” Journal of Personality 40(3):483–501. Retrieved January 7, 2018 (http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1972.tb00075.x). jamovi project (2018). jamovi (Version 0.9) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from https://www.jamovi.org Kaldana, Lina and Mitja Ruzzier. 2012. “Risk Propensity as Entrepreneurial Characteristic: The Case of Slovenian Students of Business and Economics Studies.” International Journal of Management in Education 6(4):363. Retrieved January 7, 2018 (http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=49347). Koloba, Habofanwe Andreas. 2014. “Innovation and Risk-Taking Propensity of Generation Y Students in South Africa.” Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. Retrieved January 7, 2018 (http://mcser.org/journal/index.php/mjss/article/view/4173). Lejuez, C. W. et al. 2002. “Evaluation of a Behavioral Measure of Risk Taking: The Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART).” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 8(2):75–84. Retrieved January 7, 2018 (http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/1076-898X.8.2.75). Meertens, Ree M. and René Lion. 2008. “Measuring an Individual’s Tendency to Take Risks: The Risk Propensity Scale.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 38(6):1506–20. Retrieved (http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00357.x). Mishra, Sandeep and Martin L. Lalumière. 2011. “Individual Differences in Risk-Propensity: Associations between Personality and Behavioral Measures of Risk.” Personality and Individual Differences 50(6):869–73. Retrieved (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.11.037). Schuman, Howard, Stanley Presser, and Jacob Ludwig. 1981. “Context Effects on Survey Responses to Questions About Abortion. Author ( s ): Howard Schuman , Stanley Presser and Jacob Ludwig Source : The Public Opinion Quarterly , Vol . 45 , No . 2 ( Summer , 1981 ), P.” Oxford Journals 45(2):216–23. Schwarz, Norbert and Hans-J. Hippler. 1995. “Subsequent Questions May Influence Answers to Preceding Questions in Mail Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly 59(1):93–97. Retrieved January 7, 2018 (http://www.jstor.org/stable/2749652). Schwarz, Norbert, Hans-J. Hippler, and Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann. 1992. “A Cognitive Model of Response-Order Effects in Survey Measurement.” Pp. 187–201 in Context Effects in Social and Psychological Research, edited by N. Schwarz and S. Sudman. New York, NY: Springer New York. Retrieved (https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2848-6_13). Sharma, Dheeraj, Bruce L. Alford, Shahid N. Bhuian, and Lou E. Pelton. 2009. “A Higher-Order Model of Risk Propensity.” Journal of Business Research 62(7):741–44. Retrieved (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.06.005). SITKIN, S. B. and L. R. WEINGART. 1995. “Determinants of Risky Decision-Making Behavior: A Test of the Mediating Role of Risk Perceptions and Propensity.” Academy of Management Journal 38(6):1573–92. Retrieved (http://amj.aom.org/cgi/doi/10.2307/256844). Slovic, Paul. 1964. “Assessment of Risk Taking Behavior.” Psychological Bulletin 61(3):220–33. Retrieved January 7, 2018 (http://content.apa.org/journals/bul/61/3/220). Strack, Fritz. 1992. “‘Order Effects’ in Survey Research: Activation and Information Functions of Preceding Questions.” Pp. 23–34 in Context Effects in Social and Psychological Research. New York, NY: Springer New York. Retrieved (http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-1-4612-2848-6_3). Tourangeau, R., Mick P. Couper, and Frederick G. Conrad. 2004. “Spacing, Position, and Order---Interpretive Heuristics for Visual Features of Survey Questions.” Public Opinion Quarterly 68(3):368–93. Traczyk, Jakub and Tomasz Zaleskiewicz. 2016. “Implicit Attitudes toward Risk: The Construction and Validation of the Measurement Method.” Journal of Risk Research 19(5):632–44. Retrieved (http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13669877.2014.1003957). Tversky, Amos and Daniel Kahneman. 1992. “Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5(4):297–323. Retrieved (https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00122574). Tyszka, Tadeusz and Artur Domurat. 2004. “Czy Istnieje Ogólna Skłonność Jednostki Do Ryzyka?” Decyzje (2):85–104. Van de Mortel, Thea F. 2008. "Faking it: social desirability response bias in self-report research." Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, The 25(4): 40. Warneryd, K. E. 1996. “Risk Attitudes and Risky Behavior.” Journal of Economic Psychology 17(6):749–70. Retrieved (http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167487096000347). Weber, Elke U. and Ann-Renée Blais. 2006. “A Domain-Specific Risk-Taking ( DOSPERT ) Scale for Adult Populations.” Judgement and Decision Making 1(1):33–47. Zheng, Congcong and Radmila Prislin. 2012. “Beyond Risk Propensity - the Influence of Evaluation Period and Information Relevance on Risk Taking Behavior.” Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal 18(1):1–19. Zuckerman, Marvin. 1994. Behavioral Expressions and Biosocial Bases of Sensation Seeking. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved January 7, 2018 (https://books.google.pl/books/about/Behavioral_Expressions_and_Biosocial_Bas.html?id=ApiyY8LX5fAC&redir_esc=y).