No abstract

Uncertainty-seeking behavior is currently understood as the result of loss aversion which motivates a preference for the possibility to avoid or lessen an otherwise sure loss. However, when choosing among negative options on behalf of others, we offer responsibility aversion as another possible motive for uncertainty-seeking behavior. Within our conceptual model, responsibility aversion is defined as the preference to minimize one's causal role in outcome generation. Compared to certain options, uncertain options lessen the decision maker's causal role in outcome generation because the outcomes are partially determined by chance. The presence of chance increases indirect agency on behalf of the decision maker and lessens his or her perceived risk of responsibility. The results of five studies support a responsibility aversion motivation behind uncertainty-seeking behavior.

No abstract

Willingness-to-pay (WTP) measures of the effects of changes in health on a person's welfare are more comprehensive than traditional cost-of-illness (COI) measures, but they are sometimes difficult to obtain. The authors investigated two approaches for measuring heart patients' WTP for changes in their angina symptoms. First, actual expenditures and perceived angina episodes avoided were used to infer an averting-behavior measurement of WTP. Second, a contingent-valuation approach was used to ask direct WTP questions regarding a hypothetical medical treatment that could be purchased to avoid additional angina episodes. The results indicated that although negligible COI changes were expected with small changes in angina frequency, the subjects had significant WTP to avoid increases in angina. The average WTP to avoid additional angina episodes revealed by the averting-behavior questions was comparable to the directly-elicited WTP, providing a test of the validity of the contingent-valuation approach.

In societal risk analysis the equity of the distribution of risks is often an important consideration owing to the special nature of health risks. We empirically validate some assumptions about equity that have been discussed in the decision analytic literature. Our results show that the way fatalities are distributed throughout a society is considered along with the number of fatalities in evaluating alternative policies involving mortality risks. The concepts of ex ante equity and expost equity are both shown to be important in judgments of fairness. We next present a decision model based on multiattribute preference theory incorporating the number of fatalities, as well as ex ante equity and ex post equity. When ex ante equity and expost equity are positively weighted in this fair-risk model, options with more equal risk distributions are ranked higher. Next we empirically show that the distribution of benefits has an impact on judgments of fairness. The fair-risk model does not include information on the benefits distribution, so it would apply when benefits are distributed equally or when the decision maker wishes to not include benefits in the model. We briefly discuss how the notion of proportional equity can incorporate benefits into judgments of the fairness of risk distributions. We then include benefits in a more general model in which fair risk-benefit combinations are those that are exchange equitable. A key implication of this envy-free risk-benefit model is that an unequal distribution of risks may be preferred if it is accompanied by a compensatory differential in benefits consistent with peoples' preference tradeoffs between received benefits and assumed risks. Finally, we discuss how perceived deservedness may influence judgments about equity. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of research on alternative notions of equity for policy makers dealing with social risks.