IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v77y2022i3p482-492..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Reliance on the Affect Heuristic Associated With Age?

Author

Listed:
  • Julia Nolte
  • Corinna E Löckenhoff

Abstract

ObjectivesWith age, decision makers rely more on heuristic and affect-based processing. However, age differences have not been quantified with respect to the affect heuristic, which derives judgments based on positive and negative feelings toward stimuli and concepts. This study examined whether reliance on the affect heuristic is associated with age, whether these patterns vary by task type, and which covariates account for age effects.MethodIn a preregistered study, an adult life-span sample (N = 195, 21–90 years, Mage = 52.95, 50% female, 71% non-Hispanic White) completed a battery of cognitive, personality, and socioemotional covariates as well as 3 established affect heuristic tasks: (a) a risk–benefit task, (b) a dread–inference task, and (c) an affect–impact task. Reliance on affect was indexed through (a) a negative relationship between perceived food risks and benefits, (b) a positive relationship between feelings of dread and statistical inferences about mortality risks, and (c) a positive relationship between affective responses and impact judgments when evaluating catastrophes.ResultsFor all 3 tasks, usage of the affect heuristic was documented at the group and the individual levels. Contrary to hypotheses, age was not associated with affect heuristic use for any of the tasks. Affect heuristic indices did not correlate across tasks and showed no consistent associations with the covariates.DiscussionResults suggest that the use of affect-based heuristics is context- or stimulus-dependent rather than a stable, age-associated trait. Further research is needed to validate the present results across additional domains, tasks, and stimulus types.

Suggested Citation

  • Julia Nolte & Corinna E Löckenhoff, 2022. "Is Reliance on the Affect Heuristic Associated With Age?," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 77(3), pages 482-492.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:77:y:2022:i:3:p:482-492.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbab126
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:geronb:v:77:y:2022:i:3:p:482-492.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .

    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.