Risk as feelings hypothesis.
Choice under risk
In this example we want to show that self ranking procedure can be
applied to risk-as-feeling model of choice under risk or uncertainty.
The divergence between emotional reactions to risk (and cognitive
evaluations of) is a common source of the feeling of inter personal
conflict (see, e.g., Schelling, 1984 ). Psychologists from different
sub disciplines have been drawing similar distinctions between
two qualitatively diffeerent modes of information processing. Sloman
(1996) , for example, makes distinction between rule based and
Risk-as-feelings hypothesis is illustrated in Figure 1. Loewenstein
& others (2001)  argue that in risk-as-feelings model ...
... people are assumed to evaluate risky alternatives at a cognitive level,
as in traditional models, based largely on the probability and desirability of
associated consequences. Such cognitive evaluations have affective consequences,
and feeling states also exert a reciprocal in uence on cognitive evaluations.
same time, however, feeling states are postulated to
respond to factors, such as the immediacy of a risk,
that do not enter into cognitive evaluations of the risk
and also respond to probabilities and outcome values
in a fashion that is different from the way in which
these variables enter into cognitive evaluations.
Figure 1. Risk-as-feelings model
One possible self-dual hierarchical structure of the risk-as-feeling
model is given in Figure 2. (1) In the first step we compare out-
comes with respect to one criterion, risk for example. We give the
priority to the outcome which is less risky. (2) In the second step
we compare actions with respect to each outcome in the same way
as in traditional model. (3) In the third step we compare outcomes
with respect to actions. For the fixed action we give the priority to
the outcome (among two of them) which has greater probability to
happen. (4) In the forth step we compare criteria risk and desir-
ability with respect to outcomes. The question is which criterion (as
a principle) is sustained more by given outcome.
Figure 2. Risk-as-feelings hierarchy
In the risk-as-feelings hierarchical model no a priori weights are
given. We have only a bounce of preference graphs which may be
aggregated into the group preference matrix.
An example. Choice of the climbing route.
In this example two climbers have intention to climb in the Dolomites, north
Italy. Their possible choices (after a long discussion) of the climbing
routes are (one of):
Possible outcomes are:
- via ferrata,
- classical route,
- and first repetition.
- spending a night in bivouac sac (if time goes slowly)
- exit through via ferrata (in case of emergency),
- glory (after finishing the first repetition)
- and effort.
Start iterative process