Discrepancies in risk preference in other-regarding decision making

Keywords:
other-regarding decision making, risk preference, close other, distant other, role of decision maker, loss domain, gain domain, construal level theory
Abstract

We explored the discrepancies in risk preference in other-regarding decision making from the perspective of construal level theory. We recruited 166 university undergraduates to participant in a 2 (other: close or distant) × 2 (role of the decision maker: deciding for others vs. predicting the decisions of others) × 2 (domain: gain or loss) experiment. Results showed that participants were more risk seeking in distant other-regarding decisions than in close other-regarding decisions, when predicting the decisions of others than when deciding for others, and in the loss domain than in the gain domain. Such effects were stronger in the gain domain than in the loss domain. These findings suggest that people’s risk preferences in other-regarding decision making are changeable, depending on whom they decide for and which role they play.

Author Biographies
  1. Qingzhou Sun, East China Normal University

    Key Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics, School of Psychology and Cognitive Science

  2. Peng Wang, East China Normal University

    Key Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics, School of Psychology and Cognitive Science

  3. Hongyu Liu, East China Normal University

    Key Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics, School of Psychology and Cognitive Science

  4. Yongfang Liu, East China Normal University

    Key Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics, School of Psychology and Cognitive Science

References
Downloads
Published
2016-05-03
Section
Articles
License

Author(s) agree that copyright of an article published in SBP Journal is transferred from the author(s) to the journal publisher (Scientific Journal Publishers Limited) upon publication.

Disclaimer

Social Behavior and Personality maintains an open editorial policy and may or may not endorse the conclusions made in its published articles. Neither the journal nor its publisher, editors or staff assume any responsibility for any material considered to be offensive or defamatory, or for obtaining any copyright permissions necessary for publication of articles.