IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v7y2012i2p181-188_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking Scale in Chinese college students

Author

Listed:
  • Hu, Xiaoxiao
  • Xie, Xiaofei

Abstract

Using college student samples, two studies were conducted to validate the Chinese version of the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) Scale. The results replicated important findings reported by Weber et al. (2002) in the Chinese culture. Risk-taking and risk perception were domain-specific, whereas perceived-risk attitudes were relatively stable across domains, supporting the risk-return model of risk taking. Results of both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) showed that the ethical, recreational, health/safety, and gambling domains were preserved in the Chinese version of DOSPERT and that the items from social and investment domains formed one factor. This result may be explained by Weber and Hsee's (1998) cushion hypothesis. Other possible reasons for this cross-cultural difference in the factor structure were also discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Hu, Xiaoxiao & Xie, Xiaofei, 2012. "Validation of the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking Scale in Chinese college students," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 181-188, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:2:p:181-188_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297500003016/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:2:p:181-188_6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.