|
  |
|
    |
Introduction |
Conceptual Issues |
Psychological Profiles |
Resources for Psychologists |
Further Information |
Links |
©
2003-2008 David J. Llewellyn |
Resources for Psychologists
Psychometric measures
In the following section several resources are presented that may prove useful to psychologists wanting to assess individual differences, and in particular individual differences associated with risk taking behaviours.
Risk Propensity The best measure that I have found that does not include Sensation Seeking style items: Franken, R.E., Gibson, K.J., & Rowland, G.L. (1992). Sensation Seeking and the tendency to view the world as threatening. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 31-38. The 'Attitudes Towards Risk Questionnaire' is a 20 item scale, and the short version is 10 items. There are 'Physical' and 'Psychological' risk taking subscales. I used the short version in the second stage of my own research and found it to be highly reliable and valid (factorial and concurrent validity). Sensation Seeking The standard measure here is Zuckerman's (1994) Sensation Seeking Scale V (SSSV) although the Boredom Susceptibility (BS) scale is of dubious reliability and validity. Consider using the other three subscales only (Thrill and Adventure Seeking [TAS], Experience Seeking [ES], and Disinhibition [Dis]) which would give you a 30 item total scale and three 10 item subscales. This measure is free, but be sure to use this up to date version, and beware of problems of tautology. Zuckerman, M. (1994). Behavioural expressions and biosocial bases of Sensation Seeking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Alternatively consider using the Venturesomeness scale of Eysenck and Eysenck's (1996) Impulsiveness-Venturesomeness-Empathy scale, although this is comparatively costly. Eysenck, H.J., & Eysenck, S.B.G. (1996). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Scales (EPS adult) (revised ed.). London: Hodder & Stoughton Educational.
Risk Assessments Little research has been conducted in this area, and I developed a new measure, the Physical Risk Assessment Inventory (PRAI), in to address this need during my Doctoral research. There is initial evidence of extremely high reliability (around .9 for all scales) and validity (mainly factorial and concurrent validity) in three separate studies. Further information is available upon request. This measure is free to use and can be found by following the links below:
Self-Efficacy If you need a measure of perceived self-efficacy that is specific to the domain of risk taking (as Bandura would suggest) then Slanger and Rudestam's (1997) scale may be the most appropriate.
This article details the
scales development, and the scale is available from the authors
(information included in the article).
References Click here for a list of references that relate to the study of risk taking, the conceptual issues that underpin this pursuit, or to the research methods used in this context.
Abstract of Thesis
The Psychology of Risk Taking Behaviour A PhD Thesis By David J. Llewellyn
This study investigates the psychology of risk taking, and in particular the psychological profiles associated with different physical risk taking behaviours. It was hypothesised that there may be three fundamental approaches to risk: "Risk avoiders" avoid activities they perceive to contain risk, "risk reducers" participate in high risk activities in spite of the risks involved, and "risk optimisers" who are motivated by the exposure to risk. An appropriate measure of subjective risk assessments was not identified in the existing literature, and the 27-item "Physical Risk Assessment Inventory" or "PRAI" psychometric measure was therefore developed. After initial piloting the PRAI was administered to 407 subjects. Subsequent analyses revealed that two oblique factors accounted for much of the variance in physical risk assessments, and these were initially identified as "Sports" and "Health" factors. A wide ranging test battery (including Eysenck's Revised Personality Questionnaire) was then administered to 113 subjects, and further analyses suggested that high risk sports and health risk behaviours were associated with independent psychological profiles. Health risk behaviours were associated with an "Antisocial" factor that was identified by high social and physical risk propensity, Sensation Seeking and Psychoticism. The participation in high risk sports loaded on a second "Venturesomeness" factor that was associated with high confidence, physical risk propensity, Sensation Seeking, peer behaviours and being male. A third "Physical Risk Assessment" factor was associated with high Sports and Health risk assessments, being female, and low Addiction scores. Multiple regression analyses suggested that 38% of health risk behaviours, and 60% of sports risk behaviours could be predicted by the variables included in this study. Convergent qualitative data provides additional support for the validity of these findings. The notion of a universal physical risk taking personality therefore appears to be limited to the role of Sensation Seeking and physical risk optimisation.
For further information about this thesis please contact the author.
|
