The aims of the current study are to examine the relation of risk taking behaviors (RTBs) with perceived risk, perceived benefit, and impulsivity and also to investigate the moderator role of impulsivity on the relationships between engagement in RTBs and the predictors of the engagement in RTBs (i.e. perceived risk and benefit) after controlling the effects of age, gender, and self esteem. In order to measure engagement in RTBs, perceived risk, and perceived benefit, Modified Risk Involvement and Perception Scale (&Ouml / zmen, 2006) was adapted to Turkish culture in Study 1 by using Middle East Technical University (METU) students. The sample of Study 2 was composed of 234 METU students and a questionnaire set including demographic information sheet, Modified Risk Involvement and Perception Scale (M-RIPS) (&Ouml / zmen, 2006), Barratt Impulsiveness Scale version 11 (BIS-11) (G&uuml / le&ccedil / et al., 2008), and Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale (RSES) (Rosenberg, 1965) was administered. Multiple hierarchical regression analysis was conducted with perceived risk, perceived benefit, and impulsivity as independent variables and engagement in RTBs as the dependent variable. The findings suggested that perceived risk was negatively whereas perceived benefit and impulsivity was positively related to risk taking behaviors. Moreover, as compared to perceived risk, perceived benefit was a more powerful predictor of RTB. However, it was not found any moderator role of impulsivity on the relationships between engagement in RTBs and its predictors. The strengths and limitations, as well as implications of the findings were discussed.

p. 1-178 / Submitted by Santiago Fabio (fabio.ssantiago@hotmail.com) on 2013-02-26T18:11:27Z No. of bitstreams: 1 1111.pdf: 779615 bytes, checksum: fd39f959fb007e3ab02d18e81eaedf7a (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Tatiana Lima(tatianasl@ufba.br) on 2013-03-13T20:03:42Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 1111.pdf: 779615 bytes, checksum: fd39f959fb007e3ab02d18e81eaedf7a (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2013-03-13T20:03:42Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 1111.pdf: 779615 bytes, checksum: fd39f959fb007e3ab02d18e81eaedf7a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006 / A busca por resultados satisfatórios por parte das empresas tem um de seus pilares sustentado sobre as escolhas realizadas no processo de decisão de investimentos. Nesse contexto analítico devem ser consideradas questões ligadas à natureza do projeto que pretende realizar e mais as variáveis que podem gerar resultados positivos ou negativos. Essas variáveis são consideradas na ponderação de risco que um determinado investimento tem em seu entorno e que merece análise quando do processo decisório. Esta dissertação tem como objetivo caracterizar o processo de decisões de investimento de uma grande indústria do segmento de celulose localizada no extremo sul da Bahia. A companhia em questão realizou investimentos elevados na construção de uma unidade fabril de produção de celulose voltada para o mercado externo. Tal magnitude torna a empresa um dos negócios mais importantes da região em que se localiza, sendo esse um dos motivos da escolha da mesma para a realização do estudo. Outro motivo, que torna o estudo justificável, é o fato do contexto em que as indústrias de celulose decidem seus investimentos ser marcado por diversas variáveis de risco que podem comprometer suas escolhas. No caso específico, os elementos de ordem política e ambiental, envolvendo, por exemplo, o cultivo do eucalipto, uma das principais matérias-primas para a produção de celulose e o impacto da indústria. O presente estudo investiga tais variáveis, revisa os debates que cercam o ambiente das empresas de celulose e pesquisa como a empresa em estudo pondera, controla e mitiga a influência dos eventos de risco que fazem parte de sua realidade. O estudo teve como método de coleta de dados o estudo bibliográfico, documental e entrevistas semi-estruturadas. Foi percebido que a indústria em questão utiliza as mais conhecidas técnicas de avaliação de investimentos, valendo-se do uso da simulação de cenários de risco e rigoroso processo de atendimento à legislação ambiental e estratégias de eliminação de risco, mostrando sintonia com as principais teorias sobre avaliação e decisões de investimento de longo prazo. / Salvador

AI applications are today implemented in a wide range of settings with the goal of achieving greater efficiency. However, these implementations can not be guaranteed to be free of risks. This study investigated how people perceive these risks and benefits, and whether there were any notable differences to be found between the domains in which they appear, in this case e-commerce/marketing and healthcare. Additionally, the relationship between the perceptions and individual positive and negative attitudes towards AI were examined by utilizing an affect heuristic framework. The findings showed that the two domains did differ from one another, as ratings of both perceived risks and benefits were higher for the healthcare domain compared to the e-commerce/marketing domain. Further, an inverse correlation between ratings of risks and benefits were found within each domain, which is consistent with the affect heuristic framework.

In Europe, the deployment characteristics of frontal crash restraints are generally optimised to best protect an average young male, since a 50th percentile male dummy is used in a stylised frontal impact scenario. These single point restraint systems may not provide similar levels of effectiveness when the crash scenarios vary with respect to the regulatory and consumer crash test procedures. Previous research has demonstrated that varying restraint deployment characteristics according to occupant and crash variation can provide further injury reduction in frontal impacts. This thesis reports the investigation conducted to assess the potential real world injury reduction benefit of smart restraint systems in frontal impacts. The intelligent capability of the restraint was achieved by varying the seat belt load limiter (SBL) threshold, according to the frontal crash scenario. Real world accident data (CCIS) were analysed to identify the target population of vehicle occupants and frontal impact scenarios where employing smart load limiters could be most beneficial, particularly in reducing chest injury risk. From the accident sample, the chest was the most frequently injured body region at an AIS 2+ level in frontal impacts (7% of front seat occupants). The proportion of older vehicle front seat occupants (>64 years old) with AIS 2+ injury was also greater than the proportion of younger occupants. Additionally, older occupants were more likely to sustain seat belt induced serious chest injury in low and moderate speed frontal crashes. Numerical simulations using MADYMO software were conducted to examine the effect of varying the load limiter thresholds on occupant kinematics and injury outcome in frontal impacts. Generic baseline driver and front passenger numerical models were developed using a 50th percentile dummy and were adapted to accommodate a 5th and 95th percentile dummy. Simulations were performed where the load limiter threshold was varied in five frontal impact scenarios which were selected to cover as wide a range of real frontal crash conditions as possible. From the simulation results, it was found that for both the 50th and 95th percentile dummy in front seating positions (driver and passenger), the low SBL provided the best chest injury protection, without increasing the risk to other body regions. In severe impacts, the low SBL allowed the dummy to move further towards the front facia, thus increasing the chance of occupant hard contact with the vehicle interiors. The Smart load limiters predicted no injury risk reduction for the 5th percentile drivers, who are shorter and tend to sit closer to the steering wheel. The potential injury reduction of the smart load limiters was quantified by applying the estimated injury risk reduction from the simulation to the real world accident data sample. Thoracic injury predictions from the simulations were converted into injury probability values using AIS 2+ age dependent thoracic risk curves which were developed and validated based on a methodology proposed by Laituri et al. (2005). Real world benefit was quantified using the predicted relative AIS 2+ risk reduction and assuming an appropriate adaptive system was fitted to all the cars in the real world sample. When applying the AIS 2+ risk reduction findings to the weighted accident data sample, the risk of sustaining an AIS 2+ seat belt injury reduced from 1.3% to 0.9% for younger front seat occupants, 7.6% to 5.0% for middle aged front seat occupants and 13.1% to 8.6% for the older front seat occupants. The research findings clearly demonstrate a chest injury reduction benefit across all age groups when the load limiter characteristics are varied. It suggests that employing a smart load limiter in a vehicle would not only benefit older occupants but also middle aged and young occupants. The benefit does appear to be most pronounced for older occupants, since the older population is more vulnerable to chest injury. As the older population of car users is rapidly rising, the benefits of smarter systems can only increase in the future.