Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship Between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit

A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship Between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit Judgments of risk and judgments of benefit have been found to be inversely related. Activities or technologies that are judged high in risk tend to be judged low in benefit, and vice versa. In the present study, we examine this inverse relationship in detail, using two measures of relationship between risk and benefit. We find that the inverse relationship is robust and indicative of a confounding of risk and benefit in people's minds. This confounding is linked to a person's overall evaluation of an activity or technology. Theoretical and practical implications of this risk‐benefit confounding are discussed. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Risk Analysis Wiley

A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship Between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit

Risk Analysis , Volume 14 (6) – Dec 1, 1994

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/a-psychological-study-of-the-inverse-relationship-between-perceived-F0Mc0xFUXo

References (20)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0272-4332
eISSN
1539-6924
DOI
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00080.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Judgments of risk and judgments of benefit have been found to be inversely related. Activities or technologies that are judged high in risk tend to be judged low in benefit, and vice versa. In the present study, we examine this inverse relationship in detail, using two measures of relationship between risk and benefit. We find that the inverse relationship is robust and indicative of a confounding of risk and benefit in people's minds. This confounding is linked to a person's overall evaluation of an activity or technology. Theoretical and practical implications of this risk‐benefit confounding are discussed.

Journal

Risk AnalysisWiley

Published: Dec 1, 1994

There are no references for this article.