Suchergebnisse

Nach Tversky und Kahnemans (1973) 'availability (Erreichbarkeit) heuristic' schätzen Individuen die Häufigkeit oder die Wahrscheinlichkeit eines Ereignisses danach ein, mit welcher Leichtigkeit ihnen Beispiele oder Assoziationen einfallen. Der vorliegend Beitrag zeigt, daß in den Forschungen zu diesem Ansatz die Leichtigkeit, mit der sich an etwas erinnert wird, und der Umfang des Erinnerten nicht unterschieden werden. Anhand eines Experiments mit den Einschätzungsurteilen von 28 Studenten wird der Ansatz einer methodischen und analytischen Revision unterzogen. (pmb)

Es wird von drei Experimenten berichtet, die zeigen, daß Individuen subjektiv erlebtes Erinnerungsvermögen als Information bei der Bewertung der Bedeutung des Erinnerten benutzen. Besonders diejenigen Testpersonen, die sich an Situationen erinnern sollten, in denen sie sich positiv verhielten und sich wohlfühlten, schätzten sich im Rückblick positiver ein als Personen, die sich Situationen ins Gedächtnis rufen sollten, in denen sie sich nicht positiv verhielten und sich unsicher fühlten. Dieser Effekt der Wertigkeit der Erinnerung bestand jedoch nur bei denjenigen Testpersonen, die sich an sechs Beispiele der betreffenden Wertigkeit erinnern sollten, was ihnen leichtfiel. Wenn sich die Personen an zwölf Beispiele erinnern sollten, was sie schwierig fanden, kehrte sich die Wirkung der Wertigkeit ins Gegenteil um. In diesem Fall berichteten die Testpersonen eher von einem positiven Gefühl bei der Erinnerung an Beispiele negativen als an Beispiele positiven Verhaltens. Offensichtlich kamen sie zu dem Schluß, daß die Verhaltensweisen, an die sie sich erinnerten, nicht häufig oder typisch sein konnten, wenn sie nur schwierig ins Gedächtnis zu rufen waren (Experimente 1 und 2). In Übereinstimmung mit dieser Interpretation wurde die Wirkung des erlebten Erinnerungsvermögens ausgeschaltet, wenn die Testpersonen ihre subjektiven Erfahrungen irrigerweise auf die Wirkung vorübergehender äußerer Einflüsse zurückführen konnten (Experiment 3). Diskutiert werden die Konsequenzen für das Wirken besonders der Verfügbarkeitsheuristik und der Funktionen subjektiver Erfahrungen als Information im allgemeinen. (ICAübers)

The severe impact of global crises, such as COVID-19 and climate change, is plausibly reshaping the way in which people perceive risks. In this paper, we examine and compare how global crises and local disasters influence public perceptions of multiple hazards in Italy and Sweden. To this end, we integrate information about the occurrence of hazardous events with the results of two nationwide surveys. These included more than 4000 participants and were conducted in two different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic corresponding to low (August 2020) and high (November 2020) levels of infection rates. We found that, in both countries, people are more worried about risks related to experienced events. This is in line with the cognitive process known as the availability heuristic: individuals assess the risk associated with a given hazard based on how easily it comes to their mind. Epidemics, for example, are perceived as less likely and more impactful in Italy compared to Sweden. This outcome can be explained by cross-country differences in the impact of, as well as governmental responses to, COVID-19. Notwithstanding the ongoing pandemic, people in both Italy and Sweden are highly concerned about climate change, and they rank it as the most likely threat.

The severe impact of global crises, such as COVID-19 and climate change, is plausibly reshaping the way in which people perceive risks. In this paper, we examine and compare how global crises and local disasters influence public perceptions of multiple hazards in Italy and Sweden. To this end, we integrate information about the occurrence of hazardous events with the results of two nationwide surveys. These included more than 4000 participants and were conducted in two different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic corresponding to low (August 2020) and high (November 2020) levels of infection rates. We found that, in both countries, people are more worried about risks related to experienced events. This is in line with the cognitive process known as the availability heuristic: individuals assess the risk associated with a given hazard based on how easily it comes to their mind. Epidemics, for example, are perceived as less likely and more impactful in Italy compared to Sweden. This outcome can be explained by cross-country differences in the impact of, as well as governmental responses to, COVID-19. Notwithstanding the ongoing pandemic, people in both Italy and Sweden are highly concerned about climate change, and they rank it as the most likely threat.

The severe impact of global crises, such as COVID-19 and climate change, is plausibly reshaping the way in which people perceive risks. In this paper, we examine and compare how global crises and local disasters influence public perceptions of multiple hazards in Italy and Sweden. To this end, we integrate information about the occurrence of hazardous events with the results of two nationwide surveys. These included more than 4,000 participants and were conducted in two different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic corresponding to low (August 2020) and high (November 2020) levels of infection rates. We found that, in both countries, people are more worried about risks related to experienced events. This is in line with the cognitive process known as availability heuristic: individuals assess the risk associated with a given hazard based on how easily it comes to their mind. Epidemics, for example, are perceived as less likely and more impactful in Italy compared to Sweden. This outcome can be explained by cross-country differences in the impact of, and governmental responses to, COVID-19. Notwithstanding the ongoing pandemic, people in both Italy and Sweden are highly concerned about climate change and they rank it as the most likely threat.

Abstract. The severe impact of global crises, such as COVID-19 and climate change, is plausibly reshaping the way in which people perceive risks. In this paper, we examine and compare how global crises and local disasters influence public perceptions of multiple hazards in Italy and Sweden. To this end, we integrate information about the occurrence of hazardous events with the results of two nationwide surveys. These included more than 4000 participants and were conducted in two different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic corresponding to low (August 2020) and high (November 2020) levels of infection rates. We found that, in both countries, people are more worried about risks related to experienced events. This is in line with the cognitive process known as the availability heuristic: individuals assess the risk associated with a given hazard based on how easily it comes to their mind. Epidemics, for example, are perceived as less likely and more impactful in Italy compared to Sweden. This outcome can be explained by cross-country differences in the impact of, as well as governmental responses to, COVID-19. Notwithstanding the ongoing pandemic, people in both Italy and Sweden are highly concerned about climate change, and they rank it as the most likely threat.

The severe impact of global crises, such as COVID-19 and climate change, is plausibly reshaping the way in which people perceive risks. In this paper, we examine and compare how global crises and local disasters influence public perceptions of multiple hazards in Italy and Sweden. To this end, we integrate information about the occurrence of hazardous events with the results of two nationwide surveys. These included more than 4000 participants and were conducted in two different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic corresponding to low (August 2020) and high (November 2020) levels of infection rates. We found that, in both countries, people are more worried about risks related to experienced events. This is in line with the cognitive process known as the availability heuristic: individuals assess the risk associated with a given hazard based on how easily it comes to their mind. Epidemics, for example, are perceived as less likely and more impactful in Italy compared to Sweden. This outcome can be explained by cross-country differences in the impact of, as well as governmental responses to, COVID-19. Notwithstanding the ongoing pandemic, people in both Italy and Sweden are highly concerned about climate change, and they rank it as the most likely threat.

The severe impact of global crises, such as COVID-19 and climate change, is plausibly reshaping the way in which people perceive risks. In this paper, we examine and compare how global crises and local disasters influence public perceptions of multiple hazards in Italy and Sweden. To this end, we integrate information about the occurrence of hazardous events with the results of two nationwide surveys. These included more than 4000 participants and were conducted in two different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic corresponding to low (August 2020) and high (November 2020) levels of infection rates. We found that, in both countries, people are more worried about risks related to experienced events. This is in line with the cognitive process known as the availability heuristic: individuals assess the risk associated with a given hazard based on how easily it comes to their mind. Epidemics, for example, are perceived as less likely and more impactful in Italy compared to Sweden. This outcome can be explained by cross-country differences in the impact of, as well as governmental responses to, COVID-19. Notwithstanding the ongoing pandemic, people in both Italy and Sweden are highly concerned about climate change, and they rank it as the most likely threat.

The severe impact of global crises, such as COVID-19 and climate change, is plausibly reshaping the way in which people perceive risks. In this paper, we examine and compare how global crises and local disasters influence public perceptions of multiple hazards in Italy and Sweden. To this end, we integrate information about the occurrence of hazardous events with the results of two nationwide surveys. These included more than 4000 participants and were conducted in two different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic corresponding to low (August 2020) and high (November 2020) levels of infection rates. We found that, in both countries, people are more worried about risks related to experienced events. This is in line with the cognitive process known as the availability heuristic: individuals assess the risk associated with a given hazard based on how easily it comes to their mind. Epidemics, for example, are perceived as less likely and more impactful in Italy compared to Sweden. This outcome can be explained by cross-country differences in the impact of, as well as governmental responses to, COVID-19. Notwithstanding the ongoing pandemic, people in both Italy and Sweden are highly concerned about climate change, and they rank it as the most likely threat.

The severe impact of global crises, such as COVID-19 and climate change, is plausibly reshaping the way in which people perceive risks. In this paper, we examine and compare how global crises and local disasters influence public perceptions of multiple hazards in Italy and Sweden. To this end, we integrate information about the occurrence of hazardous events with the results of two nationwide surveys. These included more than 4000 participants and were conducted in two different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic corresponding to low (August 2020) and high (November 2020) levels of infection rates. We found that, in both countries, people are more worried about risks related to experienced events. This is in line with the cognitive process known as the availability heuristic: individuals assess the risk associated with a given hazard based on how easily it comes to their mind. Epidemics, for example, are perceived as less likely and more impactful in Italy compared to Sweden. This outcome can be explained by cross-country differences in the impact of, as well as governmental responses to, COVID-19. Notwithstanding the ongoing pandemic, people in both Italy and Sweden are highly concerned about climate change, and they rank it as the most likely threat.

AbstractThis study tends to examine the moderated mediation role of external locus of control (ELC) and risk tolerance (RT) in the relationship between heuristic availability bias (HAB) and investment decision‐making (IDM). We used SPSS PROCESS Model 7 (moderated mediation) on a data set gleaned from 385 practicing stock investors at Pakistan Stock Exchange. The results of the study revealed that the relationship between HAB and IDM is partially mediated by RT, whereas, the ELC significantly moderates the relationship between HAB and RT. Moreover, in the case of moderated mediation, the ELC showed a significant moderating role in the relationship of HAB with IDM through RT. Since the findings of the study argue that ELC intensifies the influence of HAB on investors' risk‐taking propensity that inculcate them toward making investment decisions. The practical and theoretical implications of the study are discussed in detail.

Media effects on risk perception have often been explained by Tversky and Kahneman's availability principle, but research has not consistently supported it. What seem like media effects based on availability may be effects of new information. In an experimental study, entertainment movies depicting dramatic risk events were shown. They were found to produce no average effects on perceived risks in spite of large mood effects and being perceived as credible. We found, however, evidence of idiosyncratic effects of the movies, that is, people reacted immediately after the movies with enhanced or diminished risk beliefs. These reactions had faded after 10 days. Implications for the availability heuristic and risk perception are discussed.