Standing in Your Peer’s Shoes Hurts Your Feats: The Self-Others Discrepancy in Risk Attitude and Impulsivity

Wojciech Białaszek , Piotr Bakun , Elton McGoun , Piotr Zielonka

Abstract

It is often a good strategy to “stand in the other person’s shoes” to see a situation from a different perspective. People frequently attempt to infer what someone else would recommend when no advisor is available to help with a decision. Such situations commonly concern intertemporal or risky choices, and the usual assumption is that lay people make such decisions differently than experts do. The aim of our study was to determine what intertemporal and risky decisions people make when they take their own perspective, the perspective of a peer, and the perspectives of an expert or an entrepreneur. In a series of three experiments using a between-subject design, we found that taking the peer’s perspective made participants behave more impulsively and more risk aversely in relation to the participants’ own perspectives and in relation to their perceptions of experts and entrepreneurs perspectives. Taking an expert’s or an entrepreneur’s perspective did not change participants’ own intertemporal and risky decisions. We explain the findings using the risk as value and the lesser mind theories. Imagining the opponent’s perspective in a negotiation as one is advised to do might inadvertently lead to problems because we always see her as more impulsive and more risk averse than she really is. This means that taking a perspective of an expert – not a peer – would be a good way to predict what decisions our opponents make.
Author Wojciech Białaszek (Wydział Psychologii)
Wojciech Białaszek,,
- Wydział Psychologii
, Piotr Bakun
Piotr Bakun,,
-
, Elton McGoun
Elton McGoun,,
-
, Piotr Zielonka
Piotr Zielonka,,
-
Journal seriesFrontiers in Psychology, ISSN 1664-1078, (A 35 pkt)
Issue year2016
Vol7
No197
Publication size in sheets0
Keywords in Englishperspective taking, risk attitude, intertemporal choice, discounting, negotiations
ASJC Classification3200 General Psychology
DOIDOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00197
URL http://www.frontiersin.org/quantitative_psychology_and_measurement/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00197/abstract
Languageen angielski
File
fpsyg-07-00197.pdf 340.76 KB
BROWN_iR-ADV5051_11_0386_001.pdf 38.26 KB
Additional file
BROWN_IR-ADV5255_16_0106_001-7.pdf 37.12 KB
Score (nominal)35
Publication indicators Scopus SNIP (Source Normalised Impact per Paper): 2016 = 1.006; WoS Impact Factor: 2016 = 2.323 (2) - 2016=2.822 (5)
Citation count*3 (2020-09-17)
Cite
Share Share

Get link to the record


* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.
Back
Confirmation
Are you sure?