Correlates of recreational risk-taking behavior: A comparison between the Tower Building Task and two self-report measures

IF 1.2 4区 计算机科学 Q4 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Adaptive Behavior Pub Date : 2023-07-20 DOI:10.1177/10597123231189515
Joel C Hernández-Méndez, Santiago Gracia-Garrido, Robyn Hudson, M. Rosetti
{"title":"Correlates of recreational risk-taking behavior: A comparison between the Tower Building Task and two self-report measures","authors":"Joel C Hernández-Méndez, Santiago Gracia-Garrido, Robyn Hudson, M. Rosetti","doi":"10.1177/10597123231189515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Risk-taking is a ubiquitous behavior and its assessment is a central aspect of understanding human decision-making. Self-report questionnaires can be used to probe risk-taking propensities in a domain-specific manner. In contrast, most behavioral tools for risk-taking assessment provide nonspecific, unitary measures with a strong bias towards risk scenarios involving monetary gains and losses tied to probabilities. In the current work, we evaluate a behavioral task designed to specifically address recreational risk-taking, that is, situations where decision-making is driven by intrinsic motivation and performance is rewarding in its own right. For this, we chose the Tower Building Task (TBT), in which participants use wooden blocks to attempt to build the tallest tower they can; a trial ends if the building collapses, the allotted time ends, or the builder is satisfied with their tower. We correlated the TBT scores with each of the domains provided by two widely used self-report instruments, the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking scale (DOSPERT) and the Evolutionary Domain-Specific Risk scale (ERS). We found small, but significant correlations between TBT scores and those of (i) the recreational domain of the DOSPERT as well as (ii) the environmental exploration domain of the ERS. These correlation values reflect a small degree of similarity between these tests, suggesting that they capture some aspects of the complex construct that is recreation. However, the small magnitude of the correlations highlights the need for a complementary set of tools to evaluate the full spectrum of recreational risk-taking activities.","PeriodicalId":55552,"journal":{"name":"Adaptive Behavior","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Adaptive Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10597123231189515","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Risk-taking is a ubiquitous behavior and its assessment is a central aspect of understanding human decision-making. Self-report questionnaires can be used to probe risk-taking propensities in a domain-specific manner. In contrast, most behavioral tools for risk-taking assessment provide nonspecific, unitary measures with a strong bias towards risk scenarios involving monetary gains and losses tied to probabilities. In the current work, we evaluate a behavioral task designed to specifically address recreational risk-taking, that is, situations where decision-making is driven by intrinsic motivation and performance is rewarding in its own right. For this, we chose the Tower Building Task (TBT), in which participants use wooden blocks to attempt to build the tallest tower they can; a trial ends if the building collapses, the allotted time ends, or the builder is satisfied with their tower. We correlated the TBT scores with each of the domains provided by two widely used self-report instruments, the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking scale (DOSPERT) and the Evolutionary Domain-Specific Risk scale (ERS). We found small, but significant correlations between TBT scores and those of (i) the recreational domain of the DOSPERT as well as (ii) the environmental exploration domain of the ERS. These correlation values reflect a small degree of similarity between these tests, suggesting that they capture some aspects of the complex construct that is recreation. However, the small magnitude of the correlations highlights the need for a complementary set of tools to evaluate the full spectrum of recreational risk-taking activities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
娱乐冒险行为的相关性:Tower Building任务和两种自我报告测量之间的比较
冒险是一种无处不在的行为,其评估是理解人类决策的一个核心方面。自我报告问卷可以用来以特定领域的方式调查冒险倾向。相比之下,大多数用于风险承担评估的行为工具提供了非具体的、单一的衡量标准,对涉及与概率相关的货币收益和损失的风险情景有强烈的偏见。在当前的工作中,我们评估了一项行为任务,该任务专门针对娱乐性的冒险行为,也就是说,决策是由内在动机驱动的,而表现本身就是有益的。为此,我们选择了塔楼建造任务(TBT),参与者使用木块尝试建造他们所能建造的最高的塔楼;如果建筑物倒塌,规定的时间结束,或者建造者对他们的塔感到满意,则试验结束。我们将TBT分数与两种广泛使用的自我报告工具——领域特定风险承担量表(DOSPERT)和进化领域特定风险量表(ERS)提供的每个领域相关联。我们发现TBT得分与(i) DOSPERT的娱乐领域和(ii) ERS的环境探索领域之间存在很小但显著的相关性。这些相关值反映了这些测试之间的小程度的相似性,表明它们捕获了娱乐这个复杂结构的某些方面。然而,相关性的小幅度强调了需要一套补充性的工具来评估娱乐冒险活动的全部范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Adaptive Behavior
Adaptive Behavior 工程技术-计算机:人工智能
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
18.80%
发文量
34
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: _Adaptive Behavior_ publishes articles on adaptive behaviour in living organisms and autonomous artificial systems. The official journal of the _International Society of Adaptive Behavior_, _Adaptive Behavior_, addresses topics such as perception and motor control, embodied cognition, learning and evolution, neural mechanisms, artificial intelligence, behavioral sequences, motivation and emotion, characterization of environments, decision making, collective and social behavior, navigation, foraging, communication and signalling. Print ISSN: 1059-7123
期刊最新文献
Environmental complexity, cognition, and plant stress physiology A model of how hierarchical representations constructed in the hippocampus are used to navigate through space Mechanical Problem Solving in Goffin’s Cockatoos—Towards Modeling Complex Behavior Coupling First-Person Cognitive Research With Neurophilosophy and Enactivism: An Outline of Arguments The origin and function of external representations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1