The cross-situational validity of risk as a value

Abstract

Demand characteristics and risk are confounded on the choice dilemma items. Thus, it is difficult using that instrument to determine if individuals view themselves as more risky than others because of a cultural value of risk or instructional demand characteristics. The present study asked Ss to make judgments for themselves and for others on either the choice dilemmas (with risk-oriented or risk-neutral instructions) or on one of three other measures of risk taking (behavior prediction scale, risk of aversive consequences, zero expected value bets) which have exhibited the risky shift but do not have the instructional problems of the choice dilemmas. Only on the choice dilemmas did Ss view themselves as being more risky. On all other measures, Ss viewed themselves as either equal to or more conservative than others. These findings cast doubt on the validity of value type theories as general explanations for the risky shift.