Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

A Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT)Scale for Adult Populations

Contents:

Author Info

  • Ann-Renée Blais

    ()

  • Elke U. Weber
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    This paper provides a revised version of the original Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) scale developed by Weber, Blais, and Betz (2002) that is shorter and applicable to a broader range of ages, cultures, and educational levels. It also provides a French translation of the revised scale. Using multilevel modeling, we investigated the risk-return relationship between apparent risk taking and risk perception in 5 risk domains. The results replicate previously reported differences in reported degree of risk taking and risk perception at the mean level of analysis. The multilevel modeling shows, more interestingly, that within-participants (i.e., individual-level) variation in risk taking across the 5 content domains of the scale was about 7 times as large as between-participants variation. We discuss the implications of our findings in terms of the person-situation debate related to risk attitude as a stable trait. Le présent document propose une version révisée de l’échelle originale Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) mise de l’avant par Weber, Blais, et Betz (2002). Il s’agit d’une version abrégée qui se veut plus générale, s’adressant à un plus large éventail d’âges, de cultures et de degrés de scolarisation. Ce document offre également une traduction française de l’échelle révisée. Nous avons étudié, à l’aide de la modélisation multiniveaux, la relation risque-rendement entre la prise de risque apparente et la perception du risque dans cinq domaines de risque. Les résultats reproduisent les différences déjà notées au sujet du degré de prise de risque et de la perception du risque au niveau moyen de l’analyse. La modélisation multiniveaux démontre, de façon plus intéressante, que la variation dans la prise de risque pour tous les éléments des domaines de l’échelle était sept fois plus grande chez un même participant (i.e., au niveau individuel) que la variation entre les différents participants. Nous étudions les implications des résultats de l’étude en termes du débat lié à la personne-situation voulant que l’attitude à l’égard du risque soit considérée comme un trait stable.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.cirano.qc.ca/pdf/publication/2006s-24.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by CIRANO in its series CIRANO Working Papers with number 2006s-24.

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation: 01 Nov 2006
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:cir:cirwor:2006s-24

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: 2020 rue University, 25e étage, Montréal, Quéc, H3A 2A5
    Phone: (514) 985-4000
    Fax: (514) 985-4039
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.cirano.qc.ca/
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords: personality; psychometric scale; risk attitude; risk perception; risk taking; attitude vis à vis le risque; échelle psychométrique; perception du risque; personnalité; prise de risques;

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Harrison, James D. & Young, Jane M. & Butow, Phyllis & Salkeld, Glenn & Solomon, Michael J., 2005. "Is it worth the risk? A systematic review of instruments that measure risk propensity for use in the health setting," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 1385-1396, March.
    2. Elke U. Weber & Richard A. Milliman, 1997. "Perceived Risk Attitudes: Relating Risk Perception to Risky Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(2), pages 123-144, February.
    3. Sarin, Rakesh K. & Weber, Martin, 1993. "Risk-value models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 135-149, October.
    4. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
    5. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. " Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    6. Ann-Renée Blais & Elke U. Weber, 2006. "Testing Invariance in Risk Taking: A Comparison Between Anglophone and Francophone Groups," CIRANO Working Papers 2006s-25, CIRANO.
    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 in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Hemmerich, Joshua A. & Elstein, Arthur S. & Schwarze, Margaret L. & Moliski, Elizabeth Ghini & Dale, William, 2012. "Risk as feelings in the effect of patient outcomes on physicians' future treatment decisions: A randomized trial and manipulation validation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 367-376.
    2. Rassoul Yazdipour & William P. Neace, 2013. "Operationalizing a Behavioral Finance Risk Model: A Theoretical and Empirical Framework," Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, Pepperdine University, Graziadio School of Business and Management, vol. 16(2), pages 1-32, Spring.
    3. Jungmin Lee & Cary Deck & Javier Reyes & Chris Rosen, 2008. "Measuring Risk Attitudes Controlling for Personality Traits," Working Papers 0801, Florida International University, Department of Economics.
    4. Michał Krawczyk, 2014. "Probability weighting in different domains: the role of stakes, fungibility, and affect," Working Papers 2014-15, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    5. Arnaud Reynaud & Stéphane Couture, 2012. "Stability of risk preference measures: results from a field experiment on French farmers," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 203-221, August.
    6. Crosetto, Paolo & Filippin, Antonio, 2012. "The "Bomb" Risk Elicitation Task," IZA Discussion Papers 6710, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    7. April Bernard & Osaretin Iyare & Winston Moore, 2008. "Individual Risk Propensity and Risk Background," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(3), pages 53-70, December.
    8. Willebrands, Daan & Lammers, Judith & Hartog, Joop, 2012. "A successful businessman is not a gambler. Risk attitude and business performance among small enterprises in Nigeria," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 342-354.
    9. Zion, Uri Ben & Erev, Ido & Haruvy, Ernan & Shavit, Tal, 2010. "Adaptive behavior leads to under-diversification," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 985-995, December.
    10. Deck, Cary & Lee, Jungmin & Reyes, Javier A. & Rosen, Christopher C., 2013. "A failed attempt to explain within subject variation in risk taking behavior using domain specific risk attitudes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-24.
    11. Gino, Francesca & Margolis, Joshua D., 2011. "Bringing ethics into focus: How regulatory focus and risk preferences influence (Un)ethical behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 145-156, July.
    12. James Sundali & Rachel Croson, 2006. "Biases in casino betting: The hot hand and the gambler's fallacy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 1, pages 1-12, July.
    13. repec:dgr:uvatin:2011051 is not listed on IDEAS

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cir:cirwor:2006s-24. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Webmaster).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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