IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v10y2019i4p49-d298622.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Positive Impact of Task Familiarity, Risk Propensity, and Need For Cognition on Observed Timing Decisions in a Security Game

Author

Listed:
  • David Reitter

    (Google Research, New York City, NY 10011, USA
    Data collected while at The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA.)

  • Jens Grossklags

    (Technical University of Munich, Department of Informatics, 85748 Garching, Germany
    Data collected while at The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA.)

Abstract

This paper addresses the role of personality characteristics in decisions on the timing of an action, such as in the context of security and safety choices. Examples of such decisions include when to check log files for intruders and when to monitor financial accounts for fraud or errors. Two behavioral studies ( n = 461) are conducted. Individual risk propensity and need for cognition are obtained via scales. The task is a game against an opaque computer opponent in which participants make decisions about the timing of actions in response to an unknown external risk factor. The task is not payoff-neutral w.r.t. risk. Difficulty is varied through the availability of explicitly given or decision-critical information, which is observable visually (Study 1) or in temporal memory (Study 2). Across this problem space, we find that risk propensity is not generally a hindrance in timing tasks. Participants of average risk propensity generally benefit from a high need for cognition, particularly when externalized memory is available, as in Study 1. In the more difficult temporal-estimation task, need for cognition was associated with increased payoffs from task experience. In both tasks, higher risk propensity in participants was associated with increased improvements in payoffs from task experience.

Suggested Citation

  • David Reitter & Jens Grossklags, 2019. "The Positive Impact of Task Familiarity, Risk Propensity, and Need For Cognition on Observed Timing Decisions in a Security Game," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:10:y:2019:i:4:p:49-:d:298622
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/10/4/49/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/10/4/49/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Horton & David Rand & Richard Zeckhauser, 2011. "The online laboratory: conducting experiments in a real labor market," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(3), pages 399-425, September.
    2. Gallice, Andrea, 2008. "Preempting versus Postponing: the Stealing Game," MPRA Paper 10256, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Brunnermeier, Markus K. & Morgan, John, 2010. "Clock games: Theory and experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 532-550, March.
    4. Thaler, Richard, 1981. "Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 201-207.
    5. Hendricks, Ken & Weiss, Andrew & Wilson, Charles A, 1988. "The War of Attrition in Continuous Time with Complete Information," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 29(4), pages 663-680, November.
    6. Jennifer F. Reinganum, 1981. "On the Diffusion of New Technology: A Game Theoretic Approach," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 48(3), pages 395-405.
    7. Heather Rosoff & Jinshu Cui & Richard S. John, 2013. "Heuristics and biases in cyber security dilemmas," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 517-529, December.
    8. DellaVigna, Stefano & LiCalzi, Marco, 2001. "Learning to make risk neutral choices in a symmetric world," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 19-37, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stanislav Avsec & Magdalena Jagiełło-Kowalczyk & Agnieszka Żabicka, 2022. "Enhancing Transformative Learning and Innovation Skills Using Remote Learning for Sustainable Architecture Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-33, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Billette de Villemeur, Etienne & Ruble, Richard & Versaevel, Bruno, 2014. "Innovation and imitation incentives in dynamic duopoly," MPRA Paper 59453, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Margaria, Chiara, 2020. "Learning and payoff externalities in an investment game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 234-250.
    3. Gonzalez-Diaz, Julio & Borm, Peter & Norde, Henk, 2007. "A silent battle over a cake," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 591-603, February.
    4. Bobtcheff, Catherine & Mariotti, Thomas, 2012. "Potential competition in preemption games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 53-66.
    5. Catherine Bobtcheff & Jérôme Bolte & Thomas Mariotti, 2017. "Researcher’s Dilemma," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(3), pages 969-1014.
    6. Billette de Villemeur, Etienne & Ruble, Richard & Versaevel, Bruno, 2019. "Dynamic competition and intellectual property rights in a model of product development," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 270-296.
    7. Huisman, Kuno J. M. & Kort, Peter M., 2003. "Strategic investment in technological innovations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 209-223, January.
    8. Rossella Argenziano & Philipp Schmidt-Dengler, 2014. "Clustering In N-Player Preemption Games," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 368-396, April.
    9. Rossella Argenziano & Philipp Schmidt-Dengler, 2014. "Clustering In N-Player Preemption Games," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 368-396, 04.
    10. Billette de Villemeur, Etienne & Ruble, Richard & Versaevel, Bruno, 2015. "On the timing of innovation and imitation," MPRA Paper 69161, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Norman Henderson & Ian Bateman, 1995. "Empirical and public choice evidence for hyperbolic social discount rates and the implications for intergenerational discounting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(4), pages 413-423, June.
    12. Maxime Menuet & Petros G. Sekeris, 2021. "Overconfidence and conflict," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(4), pages 1483-1499, October.
    13. Helen Weeds, 2002. "Strategic Delay in a Real Options Model of R&D Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(3), pages 729-747.
    14. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    15. Antonio Cabrales & Rosemarie Nagel & Roc Armenter, 2007. "Equilibrium selection through incomplete information in coordination games: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(3), pages 221-234, September.
    16. Sorger, Gerhard, 2004. "Consistent planning under quasi-geometric discounting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 118-129, September.
    17. Min Gong & David Krantz & Elke Weber, 2014. "Why Chinese discount future financial and environmental gains but not losses more than Americans," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 103-124, October.
    18. Lurås, Hilde, 2009. "A healthy lifestyle: The product of opportunities and preferences," HERO Online Working Paper Series 2001:11, University of Oslo, Health Economics Research Programme.
    19. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:3:p:709-728 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Taisuke Otsu & Martin Pesendorfer & Yuya Sasaki & Yuya Takahashi, 2022. "Estimation Of (Static Or Dynamic) Games Under Equilibrium Multiplicity," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(3), pages 1165-1188, August.
    21. Mitchell, O.S. & Piggott, J., 2016. "Workplace-Linked Pensions for an Aging Demographic," Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, in: Piggott, John & Woodland, Alan (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 865-904, Elsevier.

    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:gam:jgames:v:10:y:2019:i:4:p:49-:d:298622. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.