1) a.
References
Correa, T., Hinsley, A. W., & De Zuniga, H. G. (2010). Who interacts on the Web?: The intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 247-253.
Fogel, J., & Nehmad, E. (2009). Internet social network communities: Risk taking, trust, and privacy concerns. Computers in human behavior, 25(1), 153-160.
Freixanet, M. G. (1991). Personality profile of subjects engaged in high physical risk sports. Personality and individual differences, 12(10), 1087-1093.
Lejuez, C. W., Read, J. P., Kahler, C. W., Richards, J. B., Ramsey, S. E., Stuart, G. L., … & Brown, R. A. (2002). Evaluation of a behavioral measure of risk taking: the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8(2), 75.
Terracciano, A., & Costa, P. T. (2004). Smoking and the Five‐Factor Model of personality. Addiction, 99(4), 472-481.
b) 1. Subjects engaging in high physical risk activities will be sensation seekers, impulsive, extraverted, stable, with high scores on Psychoticism and not very socialized.
2. The study was by survey using four different groups; 27 alpinist (those who have made several expeditions to the Himalayas), 72 mountaineering- related sportsmen, 221 sportsmen of other high risk sports, and a control group who didn’t engage in any risky sports or activities. All participants averaged around the same age, education and were all male. The Sensation Seeking scale Form V, the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, the Impulsiveness Scale of the Impulsiveness-Venturesomeness -Empathy Questionnaire, the Susceptibility to Punishment Scale, and the experimental version of the Susceptibility to Reward Scale was used to assess each subject’s personality. All subjects were mailed the questionnaires.
3. Eysenck personality scale showed high scores of extraversion and low scores of neuroticism for the non-control groups. The impulsiveness scale showed that none of the groups showed much of a difference showing that the non-control was just as socialized as the control. The three high risk activity groups did not differ from each other in the susceptibility to punishment and susceptibility to reward sale although alpinist and sportsman differed from controls on the SP scale, and sportsmen from controls on the SR scale. Alpinist had the lowest SP score and sportsmen had the highest SR score. Results also found that the three high risk activity groups can be put into a pro-social category. All the results of this study concluded that there is a personality profile in those who engage in high risk activities, wither normative or pro-social; extraversion, emotional stability, conformity to social norms, and seeking thrill and experience by socialized means (Freixanet, 1991).
2)
Table XX
Personality Traits and Adjusted BART Score
1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Openness .81 – – – – –
2. Conscientiousness (-.32**) .84 – – – –
3. Extraversion (.4**) (-.65**) .83 – – –
4. Agreeableness (.1) (.05) (.1) .84 – –
5. Neuroticism (-.48**) (.06) (-.13) (.07) .88 –
6. Adj. BART Score (.06) (-.04) (.01) (.02) (-.04) –
Note. * p < .05. ** p < .01. Scale inter-correlations are listed below the diagonal. Cronbach Alpha’s are listed along the diagonal.
Personality and Risky Decision Making
Throughout history, personality traits had been used to explain a wide variety of human actions and even roles in society. People have tried to unlock the secrets of success, and even leadership abilities to personality traits. Everyone acquires certain personality traits that make them who they are as a person. So why do people care so much about the personality traits of someone much different than themselves? Today, even years ago, people seem to need an explanation for things they might find impossible or can not do themselves. One of the most questioned abilities, one that has been able to wow people over the years, is the ability to make high risk decisions or partake in risk taking behavior. Risk taking behaviors are those that involve some potential for danger or harm while also providing an opportunity to obtain some form of reward (Lejuez et al, 2002). However, there are many ways in which someone could make a risky decision, for example, investing in stocks, partaking in high-risk sports, or even making the decision to serve in the military.
Researchers in the past have spent time researching and coming up with valid ways of measuring risk taking. Lejuez et al. (2002) used a program- based game called BART (Balloon Analogue Risk Task) to asses participants decision to take risks and compared them to a self reported measures of risk taking. In the test, participants would use the computer to blow up a fake balloon. If the balloon popped they lost points, if not they gained points. Several questionnaires were also conducted throughout the study measuring various risk related constructs. The study concluded that because of the consistent correlation of both parts of the study, BART can be used as a behavior index of risk taking, and improve assessments of real world risk behaviors (Lejuez et al, 2002). Going further into research of risk assessment, we find that there are studies that compare behaviors that society would consider risky to personality traits. Terracciano and Costa (2004) looked at the association between personality traits and smoking status. In order to do this they used the Five-Factor Model of personality. These personality traits include; openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. Their study found that the current smokers scored higher than never smokers on neuroticism and lower on agreeableness and conscientiousness. Former smokers scored intermediate on these. There was so difference between groups for extraversion and openness to experience (Terracciano & Costa, 2004). Other studies have found slightly different results with their risk factor in comparison with personality while using the Five-Factor Model. Correa, Hinsley and De Zuniga (2010) found that extraversion, emotional stability and openness to experiences play a role in social media usage. Following this study we see similar connections to another study looking more in depth at social network and risk taking, trust and privacy concerns. Having any type of social media profile is connected to having a greater risk-taking attitude (Fogel & Nehmad, 2009). Fogel and Nahmad (2009) had a wide variety of age, racial groups, and education level compared to other research in this area. This could be solely because the Internet is becoming part of our everyday lives (Correa et al. 2010) leaving them with a greater selection of participants. Risk taking and personality have not only been compared with psychological and social risk taking decision, but with physical as well. High- risk sports like mountain climbing, powerboat racing, parachuting etc. have been compared with personality traits of the Five-Factor Model (Freixanet, 1991). Four groups were formed; alpinist, mountaineering related sportsmen, other risk related sportsmen and a control. Each participant who agreed to participate was mailed several questionnaires. By looking at the 3 separate groups of high-risk activities separately, Freixanet (1991) still found that all of them shared in having the characteristics extraversion, emotional stability, conformity to social norms, and seeking thrill.
Although most of these studies are considered to me measuring a risky behavior or decision, they all seem to come up with different results as to which personality traits score higher and lower in the “risk” group of each study. This could be due to the fact that there are different levels of risk taking that need to be recognized when conducting an experiment. For example, a social media fanatic might have a completely different personality compared to someone who likes to go cliff diving for fun. Each are considered to be connected to risk taking in there studies but are completely different for obvious reasons. Since the issue has never been looked at directly, it would make sense to conduct an experiment that just looks at the correlation of personality with a test that assesses risk taking. This way there are no outside factors that might change the level of the risk.
The purpose of this experiment is to test whether personality traits are related to making risky decisions. In other words, do certain personality traits affect the way someone makes risky decisions. Participants will be male and female college students from Michigan State University. In this experiment we will be using the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) to assess risk taking in a controlled lab and then a survey to measure the personality traits of the Five-Factor Model. Due to past experiments with risk taking behavior finding high scores in extraversion, I hypothesize that those who have a higher BART will score higher in extraversion personality trait.