Risk behind the veil of ambiguity: Decision-making under social and nonsocial sources of uncertainty.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2025-07-18 DOI:10.1111/risa.70081
Nina Lauharatanahirun, Jason A Aimone, Jeffrey Braxton Gately
{"title":"Risk behind the veil of ambiguity: Decision-making under social and nonsocial sources of uncertainty.","authors":"Nina Lauharatanahirun, Jason A Aimone, Jeffrey Braxton Gately","doi":"10.1111/risa.70081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research has long documented how decision-making in risky environments differs between environments where the probabilities of uncertain outcomes are known and where the probabilities are unknown, the latter often referred to as \"ambiguous\" environments. Yet, there is a dearth of research examining how decisions may be affected by the source responsible for the distribution of uncertain outcomes. The source responsible for generating distributions of uncertain outcomes may be generated by another person (i.e., is social in nature) or by a nonsocial probabilistic mechanism. While a few studies examine how the source responsible for uncertain outcomes affects decisions when probabilities are known, the present study extends prior research to the realm of ambiguity by testing how the source of uncertainty affects both decisions when probabilities are fully known and when probabilities are partially unknown using a within-subjects experimental design. We calculate a general measurement of Social Risk Sensitivity to capture how individuals differ in their sensitivity across three uncertainty environments: risk with no ambiguity, risk with low ambiguity, and risk with high ambiguity. We find evidence showing strong correlations between Social Risk Sensitivity across all three levels of ambiguity. Our results corroborate the previous literature regarding ambiguity effects on decision-making behavior and extend prior work for the first time in this area by demonstrating that individual decisions are shaped by their individual sensitivity to the source from which uncertainty is derived.</p>","PeriodicalId":21472,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.70081","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research has long documented how decision-making in risky environments differs between environments where the probabilities of uncertain outcomes are known and where the probabilities are unknown, the latter often referred to as "ambiguous" environments. Yet, there is a dearth of research examining how decisions may be affected by the source responsible for the distribution of uncertain outcomes. The source responsible for generating distributions of uncertain outcomes may be generated by another person (i.e., is social in nature) or by a nonsocial probabilistic mechanism. While a few studies examine how the source responsible for uncertain outcomes affects decisions when probabilities are known, the present study extends prior research to the realm of ambiguity by testing how the source of uncertainty affects both decisions when probabilities are fully known and when probabilities are partially unknown using a within-subjects experimental design. We calculate a general measurement of Social Risk Sensitivity to capture how individuals differ in their sensitivity across three uncertainty environments: risk with no ambiguity, risk with low ambiguity, and risk with high ambiguity. We find evidence showing strong correlations between Social Risk Sensitivity across all three levels of ambiguity. Our results corroborate the previous literature regarding ambiguity effects on decision-making behavior and extend prior work for the first time in this area by demonstrating that individual decisions are shaped by their individual sensitivity to the source from which uncertainty is derived.

模糊面纱背后的风险:不确定性的社会和非社会来源下的决策。
长期以来的研究证明,在已知不确定结果概率的环境和未知概率的环境(后者通常被称为“模糊”环境)中,风险环境中的决策是如何不同的。然而,关于决策如何受到不确定结果分布的来源的影响的研究却很少。负责产生不确定结果分布的来源可能是由另一个人(即本质上是社会的)或由非社会概率机制产生的。虽然有一些研究调查了当概率已知时,不确定结果的来源如何影响决策,但本研究将先前的研究扩展到模糊领域,通过使用受试者内部实验设计测试不确定性来源如何在概率完全已知和概率部分未知时影响决策。我们计算了社会风险敏感性的一般测量,以捕捉个体在三种不确定性环境下的敏感度差异:无模糊性风险、低模糊性风险和高模糊性风险。我们发现证据表明,在所有三个模糊程度的社会风险敏感性之间存在很强的相关性。我们的研究结果证实了之前的文献关于模棱两可对决策行为的影响,并首次在这一领域扩展了先前的工作,证明了个人决策是由他们对不确定性来源的个人敏感性形成的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Risk Analysis
Risk Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the Society for Risk Analysis, Risk Analysis is ranked among the top 10 journals in the ISI Journal Citation Reports under the social sciences, mathematical methods category, and provides a focal point for new developments in the field of risk analysis. This international peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing critical empirical research and commentaries dealing with risk issues. The topics covered include: • Human health and safety risks • Microbial risks • Engineering • Mathematical modeling • Risk characterization • Risk communication • Risk management and decision-making • Risk perception, acceptability, and ethics • Laws and regulatory policy • Ecological risks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信