IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v15y2020i6p1024-1036_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A meta-analytical and experimental examination of blood glucose effects on decision making under risk

Author

Listed:
  • Orquin, Jacob Lund
  • Christensen, Jacob Dalgaard
  • Lagerkvist, Carl-Johan

Abstract

Previous research has shown that short-term changes in blood glucose influence our preferences and may affect decisions about risk as well. However, consensus is lacking about whether and how blood glucose influences decision making under risk, and we conduct two experiments and a meta-analysis to examine this question in detail. In Study 1, using a pecuniary valuation method, we find no effect of blood glucose on willingness to pay for risky products that may act as allergens. In Study 2, using risky gambles, we find that low levels of blood glucose increase risk taking for food and to a lesser degree for non-food rewards. Combining our own and previous findings in a meta-analysis, we show that low levels of blood glucose on average increase risk taking about food. Low blood glucose does not increase risk taking about non-food rewards although this is subject to heterogeneity. Overall, our studies suggest that low blood glucose increases our willingness to gamble on how much food we can get, but not our willingness to eat food that can harm us. Our findings are best explained by the energy budget rule.

Suggested Citation

  • Orquin, Jacob Lund & Christensen, Jacob Dalgaard & Lagerkvist, Carl-Johan, 2020. "A meta-analytical and experimental examination of blood glucose effects on decision making under risk," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(6), pages 1024-1036, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:6:p:1024-1036_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297500008214/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:15:y:2020:i:6:p:1024-1036_11. 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.