Pessimism-optimism and risk taking in individual and group contexts.

Choice-dilemmas items were administered with the customary risk-taking format (minimal acceptable odds to warrant recommendation of the desirable risky alternative) and with a pessimism-opti mism format (estimation of the actual real-world probability of success of the desirable risky alternative). Following individual testing to establish base-line levels, subjects were randomly assigned to either a risk-pessimism or pessimism-risk treatment. In the former, discussion to consensus was focused on the risk dimension, and subsequent pessimism-optimism judgments were made privately; in the latter, discussion to consensus was focused on the pessimism-optimism dimension, and subsequent risk decisions were made privately. Results indicated that the link between risk and pessimism was asymmetrical. The risky shift was produced only when discussion was oriented along the risk-taking dimension. In contrast, pessimistic shifts were obtained following both risk-oriented and pessimism-oriented discussions. Group-induced pessimism was attributed to pooling or heightened realization of the "things that might go wrong" in pursuing a risky course of action. As studies on the risky-shift phenomenon in groups continue to proliferate, investigators have begun to inquire into the conditions that militate against the phenomenon in both laboratory and real-world contexts. Thus, Madaras and Bern (1968) have recently pointed to three factors that place limits on the generalizability of risky-shift effects following group interaction: (a) moral or other "cost" considerations associated with the risky alternative; (b) the impingement of the decision consequences on persons other than those involved in the act of decision making; and (c) the observation that the shift toward risk is accompanied by a shift toward pessimism, the latter possibly having a decisive effect in a complex decision-making situation,