The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predicting domain‐specific risk taking with the HEXACO personality structure
Open accessAbstract
Although risk taking traditionally has been viewed as a unitary, stable individual difference variable, emerging evidence in behavioral decision‐making research suggests that risk taking is a domain‐specific construct. Utilizing a psychological risk‐return framework that regresses risk taking on the perceived benefits and perceived riskiness of an activity (Weber & Milliman, 1997), this study examined the relations between risk attitude and broad personality dimensions using the new HEXACO personality framework (Lee & Ashton, 2004) across four risk domains. This personality framework, which has been replicated in lexical studies in over 12 natural languages, assess personality over six broad personality dimensions, as opposed to the traditional Five‐Factor Model, or “Big Five.” Through path analysis, we regressed risk taking in four separate domains on risk perceptions, perceived benefits, and the six HEXACO dimensions. Across all risk domains, we found that the emotionality dimension was associated with heightened risk perceptions and high conscientiousness was associated with less perceived benefits. We also report several unique patterns of domain‐specific relations between the HEXACO dimensions and risk attitude. Specifically, openness was associated with risk taking and perceived benefits for social and recreational risks, whereas lower honesty/humility was associated with greater health/safety and ethical risk taking. These findings extend our understanding of how individuals approach risk across a variety of contexts, and further highlight the utility of honesty/humility, a dimension not recovered in Big Five models, in individual differences research. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations.
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.4.422 · Cited by 11,335
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2 · Cited by 6,691
The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure
Goldberg, L. R. (1992) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26 · Cited by 5,530
The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/s0092-6566(02)00505-6 · Cited by 5,265
Empirical, Theoretical, and Practical Advantages of the HEXACO Model of Personality Structure
Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2007) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868306294907 · Cited by 2,171
Depue, R. A., & Collins, P. F. (1999) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x99002046 · Cited by 2,046
Psychometric Properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory
Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2004) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3902_8 · Cited by 1,961 · cited 6×
“This trait dimension can be defined by terms such as sincere, fair, modest, and unassuming, versus sly, deceitful, greedy, and pretentious (Lee & Ashton, 2004).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialHigher-order factors of the Big Five.
Digman, J. M. (1997) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.73.6.1246 · Cited by 1,839
Narcissism, confidence, and risk attitude
Campbell, W. K., Goodie, A. S., & Foster, J. D. (2004) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.475 · Cited by 854
Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2005) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.09.016 · Cited by 830
The amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex in morality and psychopathy
Blair, R. J. R. (2007) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.07.003 · Cited by 742
Smoking and the Five‐Factor Model of personality
Terracciano, A., & Costa, P. T. (2004) · Addiction · doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004.00687.x · Cited by 422 · cited 2×
“…Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, (2010) DOI: 10.1002/bdm conscientiousness has been found to be associated with a host of risky health/safety behaviors, including risky sexual behavior (Trobst et al., 2000), smoking (Terracciano & Costa, 2004), and substance abuse (Terracciano et al., 2008).”
BackgroundInfluentialAnticipatory anxiety and risk perception
Butler, G., & Mathews, A. (1987) · Cognitive Therapy and Research · doi:10.1007/bf01183858 · Cited by 365
Schmitt, D. P. (2004) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.520 · Cited by 331
Cited by
The Dark Triad, the Big Five, and the HEXACO model
Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2014) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.048 · Cited by 291
Lauriola, M., Panno, A., Levin, I. P., & Lejuez, C. W. (2014) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.1784 · Cited by 257
The Influence of Demographics and Personality on COVID-19 Coping in Young Adults
Volk, A. A., Brazil, K. J., Franklin-Luther, P., Dane, A. V., & Vaillancourt, T. (2021) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2020.110398 · Cited by 120
Metadata
- Authors
- Weller, J. A., & Tikir, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Behavioral Decision Making
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-03-23
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 180-201
- ISSN
- 0894-3257 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0771
- OpenAlex
- W2055253603
- Cited by
- 206
- References
- 15
- FWCI
- 5.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.