Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-04T16:21:42.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modifying Evaluations and Decisions in Risky Situations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 September 2016

Antonio Maldonado ,
Sara Serra ,
Andrés Catena ,
Antonio Cándido  and
Alberto Megías
Antonio Maldonado
Affiliation:
Universidad de Granada (Spain)
Sara Serra
Affiliation:
Universidad de Granada (Spain)
Andrés Catena
Affiliation:
Universidad de Granada (Spain)
Antonio Cándido
Affiliation:
Universidad de Granada (Spain)
Alberto Megías*
Affiliation:
Universidad de Granada (Spain)
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Alberto Megías. Universidad de Granada - Department of psychology. Granada (Spain). E-mail: amegias@ugr.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The main aim of this research was to investigate the decision making process in risky situations. We studied how different types of feedback on risky driving behaviors modulate risk evaluation and risk-taking. For a set of risky traffic situations, participants had to make evaluative judgments (judge the situation as risky or not) and urgent decisions (brake or not). In Experiment 1, participants received feedback with and without negative emotional content when they made risky behaviors. In Experiment 2 we investigated the independent effects of feedback and negative emotional stimuli. The results showed three important findings: First, urgent decisions were faster [F(1, 92) = 6.76, p = .01] and more cautious [F(1, 92) = 17.16, p < .001] than evaluative judgments. These results suggest that evaluative judgments of risk and actual risk-taking may not always coincide, and that they seem to be controlled by two different processing systems as proposed by dual process theories. Second, feedback made participants’ responses even faster [F(1, 111) = 71.53, p < .001], allowing greater risk sensitivity [F(1, 111) = 22.12, p < .001] and skewing towards more cautious responses [F(1, 111) = 14.09, p < .001]. Finally, emotional stimuli had an effect only when they were presented as feedback. The results of this research increase our understanding of the processes involved in risky driving behavior and suggest efficient ways to control risk taking through the use of feedback.

Keywords

drivingdual process modelfeedbackrisk perceptionrisk-taking
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 19 , 2016 , E53
Copyright
Copyright © Universidad Complutense de Madrid and Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alos-Ferrer, C., & Strack, F. (2014). From dual processes to multiple selves: Implications for economic behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 41, 1–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2013.12.005 Google Scholar
Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American Psychologist, 36, 129–148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.36.2.129 Google Scholar
Contreras, D., Catena, A., Cándido, A., Perales, J. C., & Maldonado, A. (2008). Funciones de la corteza prefrontal ventromedial en la toma de decisiones emocionales [Function of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex in emotional decision making]. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 8(1), 285–313.Google Scholar
Contreras, D., Megías, A., Maldonado, A., Cándido, A., & Catena, A. (2013). Facilitation and interference of behavioral responses by task-irrelevant affect-laden stimuli. Motivation and Emotion, 37, 496–507. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11031-012-9327-0 Google Scholar
Deery, H. A. (1999). Hazard and risk perception among young novice drivers. Journal of Safety Research, 30, 225–236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4375(99)00018-3 Google Scholar
Di Stasi, L. L., Álvarez-Valbuena, V., Cañas, J. J., Maldonado, A., Catena, A., Antolí, A., & Cándido, A. (2009). Risk behavior and mental workload: Multimodal assessment techniques applied to motorbike riding simulation. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 12, 361–370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2009.02.004 Google Scholar
Di Stasi, L. L., Contreras, D., Cañas, J. J., Cándido, A., Maldonado, A., & Catena, A. (2010). The consequences of unexpected emotional sounds on driving behavior in risky situations. Safety Science, 48, 1463–1468. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2010.07.006 Google Scholar
Donmez, B., Boyle, L. N., & Lee, J. D. (2007). Safety implications of providing real-time feedback to distracted drivers. Accident, Analysis and Prevention, 39, 581–590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.10.003 Google Scholar
Edman, G., Schalling, D., & Levander, S. E. (1983). Impulsivity and speed and errors in a reaction time task: A contribution to the construct validity of the concept of impulsivity. Acta Psychologica, 53(1), 1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(83)90012-4 Google Scholar
Evans, J. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255–278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629 Google Scholar
Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (AIM). Psychological Bulletin, 117(1), 39–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.39 Google Scholar
Gregersen, N. P., & Bjurulf, P. (1996). Young novice drivers: Towards a model of their accident involvement. Accident, Analysis and Prevention, 28, 229–241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-4575(95)00063-1 Google Scholar
Groeger, J. A. (2000). Understanding driving: Applying cognitive psychology to a complex everyday task. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Kinnear, N., Kelly, S. W., Stradling, S., & Thomsonb, J. (2013). Understanding how drivers learn to anticipate risk on the road: A laboratory experiment of affective anticipation of road hazards. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 50, 1025–1033. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2012.08.008 Google Scholar
Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 146–159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.146 Google Scholar
Lieberman, M. (2003). Reflexive and reflective judgment processes: A social cognitive neuroscience approach. In Forgas, J. P., Williams, K. D., & von Hippel, W. (Eds.), Social judgments: Explicit and implicit processes (pp. 44–67). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 267–286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267 Google Scholar
Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (2005). Detection theory: A user’s guide. (2nd Ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Megías, A. (2014). Modulación emocional del comportamiento urgente y evaluativo en situaciones de riesgo en conducción [Emotional modulation of urgent and evaluative behavior in risky driving situations]. (Published PhD Thesis). Granada, Spain: Universidad de Granada.Google Scholar
Megías, A., Di Stasi, L., Maldonado, A., Catena, A., & Cándido, A. (2014). Emotion-laden stimuli influence our reactions to traffic lights. Transportation Research Part F, 22, 96–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2013.09.017 Google Scholar
Megías, A., López-Riañez, M., & Cándido, A. (2013). Conductas urgentes y evaluativas en función del nivel de riesgo en situaciones de conducción [Urgent and evaluative behaviours according to the risk level in driving situations]. Anales de Psicología, 29, 1032–1037. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.3.145451 Google Scholar
Megías, A., Maldonado, A., Cándido, A., & Catena, A. (2011). Emotional modulation of urgent and evaluative behaviors in risky driving scenarios. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43, 813–817. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.10.029 Google Scholar
Megías, A., Maldonado, A., Catena, A., Di Stasi, L., Serrano, J., & Cándido, A. (2011). Modulation of attention and urgent decisions by affect-laden roadside advertisement in risky driving scenarios. Safety Science, 49, 1388–1393. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.06.001 Google Scholar
Megías, A., Navas, J. F., Petrova, D., Cándido, A., Maldonado, A., Garcia-Retamero, R., & Catena, A. (2015). Neural mechanisms underlying urgent and evaluative behaviors: An fMRI study on the interaction of automatic and controlled processes. Human Brain Mapping, 36, 2853–2864. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22812 Google Scholar
Mesken, J. (2006). Determinants and consequences of drivers’emotions. Leidschendam, The Netherlands: Institute for Road Safety Research (SWOV).Google Scholar
Nazif, J. I., & Perez, G. (2011). Experiencias internacionales en campañas integrales y efectivas de seguridad vial [International experiences in comprehensive and effective road safety campaigns]. Boletín FAL. United Nations ECLAC, 294.Google Scholar
Nicholson, N., Soane, E., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., & Willman, P. (2005). Personality and domain specific risk taking. Journal of Risk Research, 8, 157–176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1366987032000123856 Google Scholar
Niv, Y. (2007). Cost, benefit, tonic, phasic. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1104(1), 357–376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1196/annals.1390.018 Google Scholar
Pêcher, C., Lemercier, C., & Cellier, J. M. (2009). Emotions drive attention: Effects on driver’s behavior. Safety Science, 47, 1254–1259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2009.03.011 Google Scholar
Pessoa, L. (2009). How do emotion and motivation direct executive control?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 160–166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.01.006 Google Scholar
Rangel, A., Camerer, C., & Montague, P. R. (2008). A framework for studying the neurobiology of value-based decision making. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9, 545–556.Google Scholar
Reyna, V. F. (2004). How people make decisions that involve risk. A dual-processes approach. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 60–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00275.x Google Scholar
Rhodes, N., & Pivik, K. (2011). Age and gender differences in risky driving: The roles of positive affect and risk perception. Accident, Analysis and Prevention, 43, 923–931. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.11.015 Google Scholar
Serrano, J., Di Stasi, L. L., Megías, A., & Catena, A. (2014). Affective sound effects on driving behavior. Transport, 29(1), 100–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/16484142.2013.815133 Google Scholar
Simen, P., Contreras, D., Buck, C., Hu, P., Holmes, P., & Cohen, J. D. (2009). Reward rate optimization in two-alternative decision making: Empirical tests of theoretical predictions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1865–1897. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016926 Google Scholar
Simen, P., Cohen, J. D., & Holmes, P. (2006). Rapid decision threshold modulation by reward rate in a neural network. Neural Networks, 19, 1013–1026. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neunet.2006.05.038 Google Scholar
Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2007). The affect heuristic. European Journal of Operational Research, 177, 1333–1352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2005.04.006 Google Scholar
Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 220–247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0803_1 Google Scholar
Vila, J., Sánchez, M., Ramírez, I., Fernández, M. C., Cobos, P., Rodríguez, S., & Moltó, J. (2001). The International affective picture system (IAPS): Spanish adaptation. Second part. Revista de Psicología General y Aplicada, 54, 635–657.Google Scholar
World Health Organization (2013). Global status report on road safety 2013: Supporting a decade of action. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.Google Scholar
World Medical Association. (2013). World medical association declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Jama, 310, 2191.Google Scholar