Evaluating a dual‐process model of risk: affect and cognition as determinants of risky choice

Abstract

In three studies we addressed the impact of perceived risk and negative affect on risky choice. In Study 1, we tested a model that included both perceived risk and negative affect as predictors of risky choice. Study 2 and Study 3 replicated these findings and examined the impact of affective versus cognitive processing modes. In all the three studies, both perceived risk and negative affect were shown to be significant predictors of risky choice. Furthermore, Study 2 and Study 3 showed that an affective processing mode strengthened the relation between negative affect and risky choice and that a cognitive processing mode strengthened the relation between perceived risk and risky choice. Together, these findings show support for the idea of a dual-process model of risky choice.

The influence of groups and alcohol consumption on individual risk-taking

“…Furthermore, the resulting behaviours understood through the disinhibition hypothesis are of an impulsive nature, and therefore only capture a specified element of risk-taking. In this respect, dual process models propose risk-taking decisions to be consequent of either hot affective states: decisions made impulsively and based on affective state, or cold analytical processes: decision-making which is thought-out, deliberated and calculated in terms of probabilities and expected value (Heinz, Beck, Meyer-Lindenberg, Sterzer, & Heinz, 2011;van Gelder, de Vries, & van der Pligt, 2009). Highlighting this distinction, intoxicated groups who are required to engage in discussion (cold processes) surrounding risky choice dilemmas, appear to select less risky options than sober groups (Hopthrow et al, 2014).…”

“…AMM further aids a possible understanding of how hot affective states (Heinz et al, 2011;van Gelder et al, 2009) may drive the effects of alcohol on risky-behaviours.…”

“…(analytical) and 'hot' (affective states) processes (Heinz et al, 2011;van Gelder et al, 2009). Negative affective states, for example, appear to increase propensity for risktaking (Kim & Kanfer, 2009;Yuen & Lee, 2003).…”

“…Negative affective states, for example, appear to increase propensity for risktaking (Kim & Kanfer, 2009;Yuen & Lee, 2003). Further, the emotional valence and expected outcome of a risky situation (e.g., analytical versus affective, gain versus loss) appear to influences risky choices (Druckman & McDermott, 2008;van Gelder et al, examining the impact of alcohol consumption on risky behaviour.…”

A Computational Model of Affective Moral Decision Making That Predicts Human Criminal Choices

“…The cognitive mode is also responsible for balancing costs against benefits and making projections about the long-term consequences of decisions and, consequently, functions much in accordance with the logic assumed by rational choice theory. The affective mode, on the other hand, remains largely unresponsive to probabilities [21]. The dual-process approach applied to criminal decision making can illuminate why notions such as severity of punishment in general have little or no effect on crime rates, why the effect of punishment certainty is only modest, and why recidivism rates are as high as they are.…”