Affective influences on risk perceptions and risk intention
Abstract
The effects of affect, as measured by the dispositional traits of positive affectivity (PA) and negative affectivity (NA), on risk perceptions and risk intentions were tested among 149 managers from a variety of industries and companies. A risk‐assessment instrument consisting of systematically varied business scenarios was used to measure managerial perceptions of the risk dimensions of uncertainty, gains/losses, framing and personal involvement. Findings suggest that positive affect (high PA) managers viewed risk‐related uncertainty and personal involvement more optimistically, but were not more willing to seek risk. Negative affect (high NA) decision makers perceived risk‐related gains more negatively and were also significantly more likely to avoid risk.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Research into cognitive processing has identified three major sources of influence on how information is processed and evaluated: decision maker utility, affect, and heuristics.
“Research into cognitive processing has identified three major sources of influence on how information is processed and evaluated: decision maker utility, affect, and heuristics [66-69].”
From Rationality versus reality: the challenges of evidence-based decision making for health policy makers (2010) · cites this paper as [68]
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524 · see citing works
Mood and the mundane: Relations between daily life events and self-reported mood.
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1988) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.2.296 · Cited by 784 · cited 1× · see citing works
“These two traits, positive affectivity (PA) and negative affectivity (NA), have been found to be consistent predictors of an individual's likelihood of experiencing particular affective states ( Clark and Watson, 1988”
BackgroundIsen, A. M., & Geva, N. (1987) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(87)90034-3 · Cited by 450 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
McCaughey, D., & Bruning, N. S. (2010) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-5-39 · Cited by 160 · see citing works
- Authors
- Williams, S., Zainuba, M., & Jackson, R.
- Affiliations
- Texas Southern University (US)
- ORCID
- Williams, Steve
- Venue
- Journal of Managerial Psychology
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2003-03-01
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 126-137
- ISSN
- 0268-3946 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1977178828
- Cited by
- 65
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 1.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Managerial Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Leadership, Behavior, and Decision-Making Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Keywords
- positive affectivity, negative affectivity, affect, risk perception, risk seeking, risk avoidance behavior, uncertainty, gain and loss, framing effects, personal involvement, managers, business risk assessment
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
