Risk information and behaviour factors
An important role when approaching risk magnitude is the presentation format of risk information. There are several types of risk-information formats, therefore one can make a decision to choose depending on the objective of the communication of risk. One would expect that risk communication is enhanced when controlling the information presented. This helps the decision-maker identify risks better and more informed decisions can be made. It is uncertain if the effects of risk information formats are consistent for various types of individual. For example, differences in the individual’s gender, criminality and nationality can affect their risk taking behaviour. Therefore, when recognising the various types of risk-information formats, the objective of the communication and the aspects of the perceiver both have to be considered.
Risk-taking is influenced by several risk-behaviour factors (RBFs). Certain factors can describe the individual more, for example their behaviour toward a specific type of risk, which could be originated from their gender, cultural upbringing or some personality trait. Some factors are associated more to the case where the risk is being evaluated, for example the way risk information is presented.
Cross-cultural Differences in Risk Preference
According to some studies the judgement and decision making of an individual is influenced by his/her background. When answering general knowledge questions, Asians have been established to be more exaggerated in their estimates of confidence, which means that they are more certain of the confidence rating scale. Additionally, differences between people from several cultures have been found in the amount of disconfirmation in testing hypothesis and in susceptibility to cognitive biases linked to financial investment. Risk behaviour can be anticipated by genetic differences which is implied from the latest studies. Therefore, it has been debated that risk perception needs to be designed as a psychological variable that is an issue to possible cultural and individual differences. This could be applicable as the meaning and recognition of risk is associated to a cultural system of meaning and social definitions.
The case that a particular and circumstantial differences in possible risk-taking are arbitrated by differences in the view of the related risks of choice options increments the possibility that national variations in favourable for prudent policies might be created by cultural or national variations in the perceived risks of precautionary and other policies.