@article{ref1,
title="Risk taking and metamotivational state",
journal="Personality and individual differences",
year="2002",
author="Howard, Rick and Yan, Tay Sze and Ling, Lee Hwee and Min, Toh Shi",
volume="32",
number="1",
pages="155-165",
abstract="This study investigated the relationship between metamotivational state, as defined in reversal theory, and risk taking in two settings: experimental-analogue (Study 1) and real-life (Study 2). The former employed a card-playing paradigm previously used by [Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., and Damasio, A. (1997). Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science, 275, 1293-1295], while the latter used a rock climbing scenario. In Study 1, an attempt was made to induce telic/paratelic and negativist/conformist states prior to the card-playing game, in order to compare risk taking between groups corresponding to four metamotivational blends: negativistic/paratelic, negativistic/telic, conformist/paratelic and conformist/telic. Risk taking was significantly higher in negativistic than in conformist groups. While there was no difference between telic and paratelic states overall, arousal-seeking significantly contributed to greater risk taking. Study 2 compared metamotivational state in experienced versus novice rock climbers, before and after a climb. While both groups were in a paratelic state before and after the climb, the experienced (but not the novice) climbers were predominantly in a negativistic state. It is concluded that a negativistic frame of mind, rather than simply one characterized by arousal seeking, is the most important experiential concomitant of risk taking and should be given due attention when considering risk taking in real-life domains such as driving or sexual behaviour.<p />",
language="",
issn="0191-8869",
doi="10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00014-9",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00014-9"
}