Predicting Risk-Sensitivity in Humans and Lower Animals: Risk as Variance or Coefficient of Variation

This article examines the statistical determinants of risk preference. In a meta-analysis of animal risk preference (foraging birds and insects), the coefficient of variation (CV), a measure of risk per unit of return, predicts choices far better than outcome variance, the risk measure of normative models. In a meta-analysis of human risk preference, the superiority of the CV over variance in predicting risk taking is not as strong. Two experiments show that people's risk sensitivity becomes strongly proportional to the CV when they learn about choice alternatives like other animals, by experiential sampling over time. Experience-based choices differ from choices when outcomes and probabilities are numerically described. Zipf's law as an ecological regularity and Weber's law as a psychological regularity may give rise to the CV as a measure of risk.

[1]  K. Waddington,et al.  Actual vs perceived profitability: A study of floral choice of honey bees , 1990, Journal of Insect Behavior.

[2]  R. Hertwig,et al.  Decisions from Experience and the Effect of Rare Events in Risky Choice , 2004, Psychological science.

[3]  I. J. Myung,et al.  An Adaptive Approach to Human Decision Making : Learning Theory , Decision Theory , and Human Performance , 2004 .

[4]  E. Weber,et al.  Cognition-mediated coevolution – context-dependent evaluations and sensitivity of pollinators to variability in nectar rewards , 2003, Plant Systematics and Evolution.

[5]  H. Pashler STEVENS' HANDBOOK OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY , 2002 .

[6]  Douglas E. Allen,et al.  Toward a Theory of Consumer Choice as Sociohistorically Shaped Practical Experience: The Fits-Like-a-Glove (FLAG) Framework , 2002 .

[7]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Framing effects and risky decisions in starlings , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[8]  C. González-Vallejo Making trade-offs: a probabilistic and context-sensitive model of choice behavior. , 2002, Psychological review.

[9]  Jamshed J. Bharucha,et al.  STEVENS’ HANDBOOK OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY , 2002 .

[10]  A. Tversky,et al.  Choices, Values, and Frames , 2000 .

[11]  M. Rabin Risk Aversion and Expected Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem , 2000 .

[12]  S. Shafir Risk-sensitive foraging: the effect of relative variability , 2000 .

[13]  Elke U. Weber,et al.  Models and mosaics: Investigating cross-cultural differences in risk perception and risk preference , 1999, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[14]  R. Freckleton,et al.  The Ecological Detective: Confronting Models with Data , 1999 .

[15]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Experience‐weighted Attraction Learning in Normal Form Games , 1999 .

[16]  Lola L. Lopes,et al.  The Role of Aspiration Level in Risky Choice: A Comparison of Cumulative Prospect Theory and SP/A Theory. , 1999, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[17]  L. Real,et al.  Risk-sensitive foraging: choice behaviour of honeybees in response to variability in volume of reward , 1999, Animal Behaviour.

[18]  E. Weber Who’s Afraid of a Little Risk? New Evidence for General Risk Aversion , 1999 .

[19]  Barbara A. Mellers,et al.  Decision science and technology. Reflections on the contributions of Ward Edwards , 1999 .

[20]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Dual-process theories in social psychology , 1999 .

[21]  E. Weber,et al.  The Interpretation of 'Likely' Depends on the Context, But 70% is 70% - Right? The Influence of Associative Processes on Perceived Certainty , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[22]  Kenneth J. Robinson,et al.  Industry mix and lending environment variability: what does the average bank face , 1999 .

[23]  A Kacelnik,et al.  Risky choice and Weber's Law. , 1998, Journal of theoretical biology.

[24]  J. Dyer,et al.  Relative risk—value models , 1997 .

[25]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Risk-sensitivity: crossroads for theories of decision-making , 1997, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[26]  E. Weber,et al.  Cross‐Cultural Differences in Risk Perception: A Model‐Based Approach , 1997 .

[27]  E. Weber,et al.  Perceived risk attitudes: relating risk perception to risky choice , 1997 .

[28]  Hermann Jahnke,et al.  Remarks on: "Some Extensions of the Discrete Lotsizing and Scheduling Problem" , 1997 .

[29]  Christopher K. Hsee,et al.  A Fundamental Prediction Error: Self-Others Discrepancies in Risk Preference , 1997 .

[30]  Wang Framing Effects: Dynamics and Task Domains , 1996, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[31]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Risky Theories—The Effects of Variance on Foraging Decisions , 1996 .

[32]  P. D. Smallwood,et al.  RISK-SENSITIVE BEHAVIOR : WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE ? , 1996 .

[33]  L. Real Paradox, Performance, and the Architecture of Decision-Making in Animals' , 1996 .

[34]  Chaney,et al.  PROBABILISTIC RISK ANALYSIS FOR TURNKEY CONSTRUCTION: A CASE STUDY , 1996 .

[35]  Scott Highhouse,et al.  Problem Domain and Prospect Frame: Choice under Opportunity versus Threat , 1996 .

[36]  Scott Highhouse,et al.  Perspectives, Perceptions, and Risk-Taking Behavior , 1996 .

[37]  S. Sloman The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. , 1996 .

[38]  Victor S. Johnston,et al.  Perceived social context and risk preference: A re‐examination of framing effects in a life‐death decision problem , 1995 .

[39]  J. Crowther,et al.  Magnetic susceptibility: Distinguishing anthropogenic effects from the natural , 1995, Archaeological Prospection.

[40]  Peter Dayan,et al.  Bee foraging in uncertain environments using predictive hebbian learning , 1995, Nature.

[41]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  How to Improve Bayesian Reasoning Without Instruction: Frequency Formats , 1995 .

[42]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Accuracy of memory for amount in the foraging starling, Sturnus vulgaris , 1995, Animal Behaviour.

[43]  Bernd H. Schmitt,et al.  Waiting time and decision making: is time like money? , 1995 .

[44]  D. E. Bell Risk, return, and utility , 1995 .

[45]  E. Smets,et al.  The potential of marginal lands for bees and apiculture: nectar secretion in Mediterranean shrublands , 1995 .

[46]  M. Hammer,et al.  Learning and memory in the honeybee. , 1995, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[47]  S. Shafir Intransitivity of preferences in honey bees: support for 'comparative' evaluation of foraging options , 1994, Animal Behaviour.

[48]  Kazuhisa Takemura,et al.  Influence of Elaboration on the Framing of Decision , 1994 .

[49]  Kazuhisa Takemura The effect of decision frame and decision justification on risky choice , 1993 .

[50]  J. Townsend,et al.  Decision field theory: a dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. , 1993, Psychological review.

[51]  C. Gallistel,et al.  Preverbal and verbal counting and computation , 1992, Cognition.

[52]  N. Sanders,et al.  Journal of behavioral decision making: "The need for contextual and technical knowledge in judgmental forecasting", 5 (1992) 39-52 , 1992 .

[53]  A. Tversky,et al.  Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty , 1992 .

[54]  S. Schneider,et al.  Framing and conflict: aspiration level contingency, the status quo, and current theories of risky choice. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[55]  J. Pligt,et al.  Problem representation, frame preference and risky choice , 1990 .

[56]  Paul J. H. Schoemaker,et al.  Are Risk-Attitudes Related Across Domains and Response Modes? , 1990 .

[57]  P. Kop Reinforcement, choice and response strength , 1990 .

[58]  P. Miller,et al.  The Effect of Framing on Choice , 1990 .

[59]  R. Thaler,et al.  Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: the effects of prior outcomes on risky choice , 1990 .

[60]  John H. Kagel,et al.  Testing between alternative models of choice under uncertainty: Some initial results , 1990 .

[61]  Robert Sugden,et al.  Preference Reversal: Information-Processing Effect or Rational Non-transitive Choice? , 1989 .

[62]  Elke U. Weber,et al.  A descriptive measure of risk , 1988 .

[63]  R. Church,et al.  Scalar expectancy theory and choice between delayed rewards. , 1988, Psychological review.

[64]  N. S. Fagley,et al.  The effects of decision framing on choice of risky vs certain options , 1987 .

[65]  Elke U. Weber,et al.  An axiomatic theory of conjoint expected risk , 1986 .

[66]  Ole S. Johnson Economic analysis of reduced tillage wheat and grain sorghum rotations in western Kansas , 1985 .

[67]  John W. Payne,et al.  The Impact of Sunk Outcomes on Risky Choice Behavior. , 1984 .

[68]  Michael L. Commons,et al.  Matching and maximizing accounts , 1982 .

[69]  D. Stephens The logic of risk-sensitive foraging preferences , 1981, Animal Behaviour.

[70]  E. Reed,et al.  The ecological approach to learning , 1981, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[71]  P. Schoemaker,et al.  Prospect theory's reflection hypothesis: A critical examination , 1980 .

[72]  Paul J. H. Schoemaker,et al.  Risk Taking and Problem Context in the Domain of Losses: An Expected Utility Analysis , 1980 .

[73]  R. Thaler Toward a positive theory of consumer choice , 1980 .

[74]  Thomas Caraco,et al.  ON FORAGING TIME ALLOCATION IN A STOCHASTIC ENVIRONMENT , 1980 .

[75]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[76]  J. Gibbon Scalar expectancy theory and Weber's law in animal timing. , 1977 .

[77]  Gustav Theodor Fechner,et al.  Elements of psychophysics , 1966 .

[78]  W. Sharpe CAPITAL ASSET PRICES: A THEORY OF MARKET EQUILIBRIUM UNDER CONDITIONS OF RISK* , 1964 .

[79]  Koch Sigmund Ed,et al.  Psychology: A Study of A Science , 1962 .

[80]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Individual Choice Behavior , 1959 .

[81]  Frederick Mosteller,et al.  Stochastic Models for Learning , 1956 .

[82]  H. Simon,et al.  ON A CLASS OF SKEW DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS , 1955 .

[83]  Thurston Dart,et al.  The Interpretation of Music , 1955 .

[84]  D. Champernowne A Model of Income Distribution , 1953 .

[85]  George Kingsley Zipf,et al.  Human behavior and the principle of least effort , 1949 .

[86]  E. Rowland Theory of Games and Economic Behavior , 1946, Nature.

[87]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of games and economic behavior , 1945, 100 Years of Math Milestones.

[88]  E. Thorndike “Animal Intelligence” , 1898, Nature.

[89]  I. P. Christensen,et al.  Psychophysics , 2019, Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science.