IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/rdepol/v6y2001i01p47-69_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Domain-specificity and gender differences in decision making

Author

Listed:
  • Blais, Ann-Renee
  • Weber, Elke U.

Abstract

This paper examines the effect of characteristics of the decision situation and of the decision maker on decision processes and outcomes in the context of risky choice. Male and female undergraduate students were presented with decisions from different domains of life. For each decision they indicated the likelihood with which they would use each of five decision modes (i.e., ways of making the decision): by following someone's advice, by weighing pros and cons, by following their intuition, etc. They also chose between two courses of action described for each decision and rated the perceived riskiness of both alternatives. We found that the content domain of the decision and/or the gender (or the interaction of both) of the decision maker influenced decision mode usage, and risk perception, behavior, and preference (derived within a risk-return model of risky choice). These results have implications for educational interventions and decision aids that attempt to influence or change the risky decisions of target populations.

Suggested Citation

  • Blais, Ann-Renee & Weber, Elke U., 2001. "Domain-specificity and gender differences in decision making," Risk, Decision and Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 47-69, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:rdepol:v:6:y:2001:i:01:p:47-69_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1357530901000254/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rupi, Federico & Freo, Marzia & Poliziani, Cristian & Postorino, Maria Nadia & Schweizer, Joerg, 2023. "Analysis of gender-specific bicycle route choices using revealed preference surveys based on GPS traces," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-14.
    2. Shelia M. Kennison & Erin E. Wood & Jennifer Byrd-Craven & Megan L. Downing, 2016. "Financial and ethical risk-taking by young adults: A role for family dynamics during childhood," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1232225-123, December.
    3. Dina Verdín & Allison Godwin & Adam Kirn & Lisa Benson & Geoff Potvin, 2018. "Engineering Women’s Attitudes and Goals in Choosing Disciplines with Above and Below Average Female Representation," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-25, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:rdepol:v:6:y:2001:i:01:p:47-69_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/rdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.