The authors examine how perceived similarity between sequential risks affects individuals’ risk-taking intentions. Specifically, in six studies, the authors find that, in sequential choice settings, individuals exhibit significant positive state dependence in risk-taking preferences, such that they are more likely to take a risk when it is similar to a previously taken risk than when it is dissimilar. For example, if an individual has previously taken a health/safety risk, that individual is more likely to take a second health/safety risk than a second risk that is in the financial domain. The authors show that because similarity between risks is malleable and can be determined by situational and contextual variables, subsequent risk-taking intentions can be changed in a predictable manner when similarity is manipulated through framing. The authors establish that increased feelings of self-efficacy and self-signaling through the prior risk-taking experience drive state-dependent risk-taking preferences. The authors further show that the effect of similarity on preferences is not moderated by the outcome received in the prior risk and holds when controlling for individual-level and domain-specific heterogeneity. Taken together, the results demonstrate that the similarity structures that exist between risks have a significant effect on risk-taking preferences in dynamic choice settings.
BanduraAlbert (1977), “Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change,” Psychological Review, 84 (2), 191–215.
2.
BemDaryl J. (1972), “Self-Perception Theory,” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 6 (1), 1–32.
3.
BenartziShlomoThalerRichard H. (1999), “Risk Aversion or Myopia? Choices in Repeated Gambles and Retirement Investments,” Management Science, 45 (3), 364–81.
4.
BlaisAnn-ReneeWeberElke U. (2006), “A Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) Scale for Adult Populations,” Judgment and Decision Making, 1 (1), 33–47.
5.
BlankenIreneVenNiels van deZeelenbergMarcel (2015), “A Meta-Analytic Review of Moral Licensing,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41 (4), 540–58.
6.
BodnerRonitPrelecDrazen (2002), “Self-Signaling and Diagnostic Utility in Everyday Decision Making,” in Collected Essays in Psychology and Economics, BrocasI.CarilloJ., eds. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 105–26.
7.
CrosonRachelSundaliJames (2005), “The Gambler’s Fallacy and the Hot Hand: Empirical Data from Casinos,” The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 30 (3), 195–209.
8.
DemareeHeath A.BurnsKevin J.DeDonnoMichael A.AgarwalaEdward K.Erik EverhartD. (2012), “Risk Dishabituation: In Repeated Gambling, Risk Is Reduced Following Low-Probability ‘Surprising’ Events (Wins or Losses),” Emotion, 12 (3), 495–502.
9.
DharRaviSimonsonItamar (1999), “Making Complementary Choices in Consumption Episodes: Highlighting Versus Balancing,” Journal of Marketing Research, 36 (1), 29–44.
10.
FoxCraig R.LevavJonathan (2000), “Familiarity Bias and Belief Reversal in Relative Likelihood Judgment,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82 (2), 268–92.
11.
FoxCraig R.RatnerRebecca K.LiebDaniel S. (2005), “How Subjective Grouping of Options Influences Choice and Allocation: Diversification Bias and the Phenomenon of Partition Dependence,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134 (4), 538–51.
12.
FoxCraig R.SeeKelly E. (2003), “Belief and Preference in Decision Under Uncertainty,” in Thinking: Psychological Perspectives on Reasoning, Judgment, and Decision Making, HardmanD.MacchiL., eds. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 273–314.
13.
FoxCraig R.TverskyAmos (1998), “A Belief-Based Account of Decision Under Uncertainty,” Management Science, 44 (7), 879–95.
14.
GentnerDedreMarkmanArthur B. (1997), “Structure Mapping in Analogy and Similarity,” American Psychologist, 52 (1), 45–56.
15.
GneezyUriPottersJan (1997), “An Experiment on Risk-Taking and Evaluation Periods,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112 (2), 631–45.
16.
HaisleyEmilyMostafaRomelLoewensteinGeorge (2008), “Myopic Risk-Seeking: The Impact of Narrow Decision Bracketing on Lottery Play,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 37 (1), 57–75.
17.
HausmanJ.A. (1978), “Specification Tests in Econometrics,” Econometrica, 46 (6), 1251–71.
18.
HayesAndrew F. (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach, KennyD.A.LittleT.D., eds. New York: Guilford Press.
19.
HeathChipTverskyAmos (1991), “Preference and Belief: Ambiguity and Competence in Choice Under Uncertainty,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 4 (1), 5–28.
20.
HeckmanJames J. (1981), “Heterogeneity and State Dependence,” in Studies in Labor Markets, RosenS., ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 91–140.
21.
HendersonPamela W.PetersonRobert A. (1992), “Mental Accounting and Categorization,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51 (1), 92–117.
22.
HertwigRalphBarronGregWeberElke U.ErevIdo (2004), “Decisions from Experience and the Effect of Rare Events in Risky Choice,” Psychological Science, 15 (1), 534–39.
23.
HoltgraveDavid R.WeberElke U. (1993), “Dimensions of Risk Perception for Financial and Health Risks,” Risk Analysis, 13 (5), 553–58.
24.
HubermanGur (2001), “Familiarity Breeds Investment,” The Review of Financial Studies, 14 (1), 659–80.
25.
JohnsonEric J.TverskyAmos (1983), “Affect, Generalization, and the Perception of Risk,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45 (1), 20–31.
26.
KahnemanDanielLovalloDan (1993), “Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking,” Management Science, 39 (1), 17–31.
27.
KahnemanDanielTverskyAmos (1979), “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decisions Under Risk,” Econometrica, 47 (2), 263–91.
28.
KeaneMichael P. (1997), “Modeling Heterogeneity and State Dependence in Consumer Choice Behavior,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 15 (3), 310–27.
29.
KruegerNorrisDicksonPeter R. (1994), “How Believing in Ourselves Increases Risk Taking: Perceived Self-Efficacy and Opportunity Recognition,” Decision Sciences, 25 (3), 385–400.
30.
LangerEllen J. (1975), “The Illusion of Control,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32 (2), 311–28.
31.
LangerThomasWeberMartin (2001), “Prospect Theory, Mental Accounting, and Differences in Aggregated and Segregated Evaluation of Lottery Portfolios,” Management Science, 47 (5), 716–33.
MellersBarbara A.SchwartzAlanWeberElke U. (1997), “Do Risk Attitudes Reflect in the Eye of the Beholder?” in Choice, Decision, and Measurement, MarleyA.A.J., ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 57–71.
39.
MervisCarolyn B.RoschEleanor (1981), “Categorization of Natural Objects,” Annual Review of Psychology, 32 (1), 89–115.
40.
PayneJohn W. (2005), “It Is Whether You Win or Lose: The Importance of the Overall Probabilities of Winning or Losing in Risky Choice,” The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 30 (1), 5–19.
41.
RabinMatthewThalerRichard H. (2001), “Anomalies: Risk Aversion,” The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15 (1), 219–32.
42.
ReadDanielLoewensteinGeorgeRabinMatthew (1999), “Choice Bracketing,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19 (1–3), 171–97.
43.
RedelmeierDonald A.TverskyAmos (1992), “On the Framing of Multiple Prospects,” Psychological Science, 3 (3), 191–93.
44.
RitovIlanaBaronJonathan (1992), “Status-Quo and Omission Biases,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5 (1), 49–61.
RottenstreichYuvalHseeChristopher K. (2001), “Money, Kisses, and Electric Shocks: On the Affective Psychology of Risk,” Psychological Science, 12 (3), 185–90.
47.
RoyRishinChintaguntaPradeep K.HaldarSudeep (1996), “A Framework for Investigating Habits, ‘The Hand of the Past,’ and Heterogeneity in Dynamic Brand Choice,” Marketing Science, 15 (3), 280–99.
48.
SchwarzNorbertVaughnLeigh Ann (2002), “The Availability Heuristic Revisited: Ease of Recall and Content of Recall as Distinct Sources of Information,” in Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, GilovichT.GriffinD.KahnemanD., eds. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 103–19.
49.
SchwarzerRalf, ed (1992), Self-Efficacy: Thought Control of Action. London: Taylor & Francis Group.
50.
SeetharamanP.B.AinslieAndrewChintaguntaPradeep K. (1999), “Investigating Household State Dependence Effects Across Categories,” Journal of Marketing Research, 36 (4), 488–500.
51.
SlovicPaulFinucaneMelissa L.PetersEllenMacGregorDonald G. (2004), “Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts About Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality,” Risk Analysis, 24 (2), 311–22.
52.
SlovicPaulFischoffBaruchLichtensteinSarah (1978), “Accident Probabilities and Seat Belt Usage: A Psychological Perspective,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, 10 (4), 281–85.
53.
SteulMartina (2006), “Does the Framing of Investment Portfolios Influence Risk-Taking Behavior? Some Experimental Results,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 27 (4), 557–70.
54.
SundaliJamesCrosonRachel (2006), “Biases in Casino Betting: The Hot Hand and the Gambler’s Fallacy,” Judgment and Decision Making, 1 (1), 1–12.
55.
TateCharlotte Ursula (2015), “On the Overuse and Misuse of Mediation Analysis: It May Be a Matter of Timing,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 37(4), 235–46.
56.
ThalerRichard H. (1985), “Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice,” Marketing Science, 4 (3), 199–214.
57.
ThalerRichard H. (1999), “Mental Accounting Matters,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12 (3), 183–206.
58.
ThalerRichard H.JohnsonEric J. (1990), “Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice,” Management Science, 36 (6), 643–60.
59.
TverskyAmos (1977), “Features of Similarity,” Psychological Review, 84, 327–52.
60.
TverskyAmosKahnemanDaniel (1992), “Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5 (4), 297–323.
61.
WeberElke U.BlaisAnn-ReneeBetzNancy E. (2002), “A Domain-Specific Risk-Attitude Scale: Measuring Risk Perceptions and Risk Behaviors,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15 (4), 263–90.
62.
WeberElke U.HseeChristopher K. (1998), “Cross-Cultural Differences in Risk Perception, but Cross-Cultural Similarities in Attitudes Towards Perceived Risk,” Management Science, 44 (9), 1205–17.
63.
WeberElke U.MillimanRichard A. (1997), “Perceived Risk Attitudes: Relating Risk Perception to Risky Choice,” Management Science, 43 (2), 123–44.
64.
WedellDouglas H.BöckenholtUlf (1994), “Contemplating Single Versus Multiple Encounters of a Risky Prospect,” The American Journal of Psychology, 107 (4), 499–518.
65.
XuJueminHarveyNigel (2014), “Carry on Winning: The Gamblers’ Fallacy Creates Hot Hand Effects in Online Gambling,” Cognition, 131 (2), 173–80.
66.
YangAdelle X.UrminskyOleg (2015), “The Foresight Effect: Local Optimism Motivates Consistency and Local Pessimism Motivates Variety,” Journal of Consumer Research, 42 (3), 361–77.
67.
ZhaoXinshuLynchJohn G.JrChenQimei (2010), “Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis,” Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
