Cited by 56Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsRisk Perception and ManagementLeadership, Behavior, and Decision-Making Studies

“Leaving it to chance”—Passive risk taking in everyday life

Open access
Keinan, Ruty, Bereby-Meyer, Yoella·2012·Judgment and Decision Making

Abstract

While risk research focuses on actions that put people at risk, this paper introduces the concept of “passive risk”—risk brought on or magnified by inaction. We developed a scale measuring personal tendency for passive risk taking (PRT), validated it using a 150 undergraduate student sample, and obtained three factors indicating separate domains of passive risk taking: risk involving resources, medical risks and ethical risks. The scale has criterion validity, as it is correlated with reported passive risk taking in everyday life, and also has high test-retest reliability. While correlated with the DOSPERT scale, the PRT shows divergent validity from classic risk taking constructs like sensation seeking, and convergent validity with tendencies previously not linked to risk taking, such as procrastination and avoidance. The results indicate that passive risk is a separate and unique domain of risk taking, which merits further research to understand the cognitive and motivational mechanism perpetuating it.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1930297500003259

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A prior study found no evidence of a correlation between risk attitude measured by the DOSPERT scale and self-reported procrastination tendency measured by the Lay Procrastination Scale.

    “A prior study38 found no evidence of a correlation between the risk attitude measured by the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) scale39 and self-reported procrastination tendency measured by the Lay Procrastination Scale40.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Pickrell, 2011, Seat belt use in 2011—Overall results.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keinan, R., & Bereby-Meyer, Y.
Affiliations
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
Corresponding author
Keinan, Ruty
Venue
Judgment and Decision Making
Published
2012-11
Volume
7
Issue
6
Pages
705-715
ISSN
1930-2975 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W141515198
Cited by
55
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5
FWCI
2.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Judgment and Decision Making (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Leadership, Behavior, and Decision-Making Studies
Keywords
risk-taking, inaction, scale development, medical risk, ethical risks, resource risk, DOSPERT, sensation seeking, procrastination, avoidance, personality traits

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