Is the DOSPERT gender invariant? A psychometric test of measurement invariance

Abstract

It is well established in the risk literature that men tend to take more risks than women. This gender difference, however, is often qualified by its domain specificity. Considering recent research on the domain generality of risk taking as a disposition, there is a need to examine the degree to which men take more risks than women, in general. In order to make substantive conclusions about the gender differences in risk‐taking propensity, one must first establish measurement invariance, which is required for the meaningful interpretation of observed group differences. In this paper, we examined the measurement invariance of the Domain‐Specific Risk‐Taking scale (DOSPERT)—one of the most popular measures of individual differences in risk taking. We found that the DOSPERT violated configural invariance in a bifactor model, indicating that the underlying factor structure of the DOSPERT differs between men and women. Even after removing the social risk dimension, DOSPERT still failed to reach scalar invariance. Taken together, these findings suggest that score differences in the DOSPERT may be due to response artifacts rather than true differences in the latent construct. Therefore, gender differences in the DOSPERT must be interpreted with caution. Implications for the measurement of risk taking are discussed.

How much risk can you stomach? Individual differences in the tolerance of perceived risk across gender and risk domain

“…This finding suggests that domain specificity in perceptions of risks and benefits may have been exaggerated—in terms of dissociations across risk domains—in previous studies with the DOSPERT. Recently, researchers have questioned the extent of domain specificity in risk taking behavior (Frey, Pedroni, Mata, Rieskamp, & Hertwig, ; Highhouse et al, ; Zhang, Foster, & McKenna, ). Frey et al () assessed individual differences in risk taking across 39 measures of risk preference.…”

“…Their findings indicate that apparent gender differences in risk taking can be highly dependent on the specific items selected to represent a risk domain. Moreover, Zhang, Foster, and McKenna (2019) found that the underlying factor structure of the DOSPERT differs for men and women, which raises additional concerns about the assessment of gender differences in self-reported risk taking on the DOSPERT.…”

“…A wealth of previous research within the psychological riskreturn framework has led to the conclusion that differences in selfreported risk taking behavior across people and contexts (e.g., risk domains) is attributable to differences in the perceived magnitude or risk (i.e., perceived riskiness of an activity) rather than to differences in risk attitude. For example, Weber et al (2002) reported that women were more risk averse than men and that such gender differences in risk taking were due to differences in risk perception and expected benefits and not to differences in their attitude toward perceived risk (see also Figner & Weber, 2011;Hanoch, Johnson, & Wilke, 2006;Harris, Jenkins, & Glaser, 2006;Rolison, Hanoch, & Freund, in press;Rolison, Hanoch, Wood, & Pi-Ju, 2014; but see Zhang, Foster, & McKenna, 2019). Cultural differences in risk taking have also been attributed to differences in the perceived riskiness of activities rather than to differences in attitudes toward risk (Weber & Hsee, 1998, 1999.…”

Spanish Women Making Risky Decisions in the Social Domain: The Mediating Role of Femininity and Fear of Negative Evaluation

“…Their findings indicated that in the social domain, women perceived greater risk than men; in other words, they had a lower tolerance for risk. On the other hand, Zhang et al (2019) pointed out that risk-taking in the social domain functions differently across groups. Furthermore, other authors have argued that there is a gender confirmation bias in risk-taking due to its traditional association with stereotypically masculine activity (Morgenroth et al, 2018), which could affect women's behavior.…”

“…The literature has indicated that women rate themselves more likely to make risky decisions in the social domain (e.g., Figner and Weber, 2011). Nevertheless, there is controversy around this finding (Zhang et al, 2019), which may cause confusion because people who identify themselves as more feminine -traditionally women -are conditioned to be more cautious, whereas those who identify themselves as more masculine -traditionally men -are conditioned to be riskier (Carver et al, 2013). In this sense, the social domain (e.g., "speaking your mind about an unpopular issue in a meeting at work" or "moving to a city far away from your extended family") is a context in which women could experience more FNE if they were to make risky decisions, given that they would deviate from their traditional role (Rudman et al, 2012).…”