Two direct elicitation of utility (D.E.U.) techniques were used to estimate risk attitudes of a group of agricultural producers. The two elicitation techniques used in the study were 1) an error-in-response model using a modified Ramsey method, and 2) stochastic dominance with respect to a function (SDF). The primary objective of the study was to determine whether the two elicitation techniques yield consistent estimates of risk attitudes. A second major objective of the study was to provide additional information about the distribution of risk attitudes among agricultural producers. The study confirmed the results of other research efforts that the majority of risk attitude parameters of agricultural producers lie within the range -.0001 and .001 with income measured in dollars [King and Robison, 1980]. The study also supports previous research results which indicate that a significant portion of decision makers exhibit risk preferring behavior, at least over some ranges of incomes. The error-in-response model classified 38.1% of the respondents as risk preferring, 47.6% as risk neutral, and 14.3% as risk averse. With only one exception, the SDF technique elicited risk preferring attitudes for every respondent over some range of income values. Individual and aggregate tests for decreasing (increasing) absolute risk aversion were conducted. No respondents were found to exhibit increasing or decreasing absolute risk aversion. The statistical comparison of the two elicitation techniques was inconclusive. A paired t-test failed to reject the null hypothesis of no difference in the estimated risk attitudes. However, the correlation between the two measures was virtually zero (-.046) suggesting that the two measures of risk attitudes are not closely related. The two elicitation techniques were also compared on other grounds. Both elicitation techniques are designed to prevent certainty bias that has plagued other D.E.U. methods. The SDF technique is found to be superior in overcoming possible interviewer bias. Neither technique is superior in coping with probability bias. The SDF technique is easier to implement but the error-in- response questionnaire is easier to formulate. The error-in- response model results in a specific estimate of the respondent's risk attitude when the negative exponential utility function is used. Based on the comparisons made in the study, the SDF procedure is considered to be superior to the error-in-response model for eliciting risk attitudes. / Graduation date: 1986

Thesis (Ph.D)--Boston University. / The aims of this study were: (1) to test whether hypotheses regarding the behavior of schizophrenics which had received support in level of aspiration studies would also be supported by decision theory type chance taking measures; and (2) to examine the kinds of risks toward which schizophrenics were most sensitive. Two theoretical models, decision theory and level of aspiration theory, dealing with decision making in situations involving the threat of failure, were shown to be basically similar in their formulation; they differed, however, in regard to the independence of probability and reward, and the degree of the individual's control over the outcome and the motive of achievement. "Risk," which was considered to be the objective equivalent of the clinical concept "threat of failure," was defined operationally as the negative term of the expected value model (i.e., as the product of the probability of loss and the amount of possible loss). [TRUNCATED]

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 1991. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves [126]-138).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 75-89) Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 1999. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 177-187). Available also in a digital version from Dissertation Abstracts.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 75-89) Also available online.

Thesis (M.A.) -- Central Connecticut State University, 2006. / Thesis advisor: C. Charles Mate-Kole. "... in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts ... Department of Psychology." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 30-35). Also available via the World Wide Web.

M.A. (Psychology) / The present study was conducted to investigate the relationship between personality and risk taking behaviour in the South African context. Personality was measured with the Basic Traits Inventory (BTl), an assessment specifically developed to measure the broad dimensions of the five factor model of personality (John & Srivastava, 1999) in South Africa. The five dimensions on the BTl have the same names as the well-known five factor model, namely: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. The primary objective of this study was to investigate the underlying personality structure across ten different forms of risk-related behaviour. The risk behaviours included smoking, alcohol consumption,.illegal drug use, sexual promiscuity, thrill-seeking activities, gambling, physical violence, romantic infidelity and other behaviours that may have led to a respondent being arrested. Given South Africa's unique population, a further objective ofthis study was to examine the degree to which the results from the study would be in line with those reported in so-called Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. The sample consisted of 683 respondents, all second-year students from a bilingual (Afrikaans and English) university in Johannesburg. There were 142 men and 538 women in the sample. Three of the respondents' gender was unknown. There were 425 White respondents, 120 Black respondents, 83 Indian respondents, 46 Coloured respondents and nine respondents who did not specify any population group. Respondents' mean age was 20.99 years with a standard deviation of5.10 years. The sample was not representative ofthe South African population, with men being underrepresented and White respondents overrepresented in comparison to other population groups. A multivariate technique, Descriptive Discriminant Analysis, was used to analyse personality differences across groups. The groups were formed based on the frequency with which individuals engaged in the different risk-behaviours. Post-hocanalyses allowed for a close rexamination of group differences. The results revealed that a single, statistically significant discriminant functionemergedfor all ten of the risk variables with the exceptionof one, for whichtwo possible discriminant functions were identified. This showed that different combinations of the five personality factors were, to some extent, able to account for group separation on each of the risk variables. Considering the results as a whole, some interesting findings were revealed: It became evident that no single personality structureexists across the different risk-variables of this study. It was clear that some personality factors were more important, whereas others were less important, depending on the type of risk-behaviour being considered. Despite these seeming differences, important patterns of personality emergedacross the risk-variables. Conscientiousness, and in particular, Extraversion were identified as the most salient predictors of the risk-behaviours in this study, although important contributions were also made by the remaining personality factors: Conscientiousness was further found to be the most important predictor of health-risk behaviours such as smoking, alcohol consumption, and druguse. In general, Opennessto Experience, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism appeared to be more selectively associated with specific risk-behaviours when compared to Extraversion and Conscientiousness. Overall, the findings reported in this study were largely in line with those reported in so called WEIRD countries. The results of this study further supported the generalisability of prior research regarding the relationship between personality and risk-taking. It also demonstrated the utility of the five factor model as a promising predictor of risky behaviour. For future research it is recommended that the facet-scale level of the BTl be used to further investigate the personality-risk relationship.

The first two experiments examined the relationship between risk and trust behaviour in two field situations. The third experiment was a replication of Wright, Maggied, and Palmer (1975). A conceptualization of trust, which included the factors: disposition, risk assessment (level of risk and interpersonal variables), and behavioural intention was outlined. The subject group was composed of 240 female undergraduates enlisted on the premises of the main library at the University of Victoria, Canada. In the first two experiments, a between groups' trust behaviour was compared over conditions of low and high manipulated risk. In both experiments, trust behaviour, which was found to vary significantly over risk conditions, was compared with ratings of risk assessment and scores obtained on Rotter's Interpersonal Trust Scale (ITS). Preliminary indications are that trust behaviour is not significantly related to risk-taking as reflected by subjects' choice of prize for completing the experiment. The third experiment did not replicate the results of Wright, et al. (1975) and showed no relationship between the number and type of questions asked by high or low scorers on the ITS. / Arts, Faculty of / Psychology, Department of / Graduate