Dataset Information

Is human life worth peanuts? Risk attitude changes in accordance with varying stakes.

ABSTRACT: Risk aversion is well-known as a general and robust characteristic of people's decision making: people are less likely to gamble when they are unsure if they will obtain the expected value of the bet made. The "peanuts effect" is, however, an exception to this general rule. The "peanuts effect," which states that people are more willing to gamble when playing for "peanuts" (a small outcome), has been stably observed in the context of a small monetary stake. We conducted two types of experiments to verify whether the peanuts effect still occurred when the type of stakes changed. We had two main findings. On the one hand, people tended to gamble more for a qualitatively smaller value when the stake was material in nature, meaning that the "peanuts effect" occurred with a qualitatively low stake. On the other hand, people were willing to take a risk for a qualitatively larger value when the stake was a human life: this is the opposite phenomenon of the "peanuts effect."

SUBMITTER: Shimizu K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6084950 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is human life worth peanuts? Risk attitude changes in accordance with varying stakes.

Shimizu Kazumi K Udagawa Daisuke D

PloS one 20180809 8

Risk aversion is well-known as a general and robust characteristic of people's decision making: people are less likely to gamble when they are unsure if they will obtain the expected value of the bet made. The "peanuts effect" is, however, an exception to this general rule. The "peanuts effect," which states that people are more willing to gamble when playing for "peanuts" (a small outcome), has been stably observed in the context of a small monetary stake. We conducted two types of experiments ...[more]

PMID: 30092062

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFrequently, ingestion of lipids exceeds our daily requirements and constantly exposes humans to circulating lipid overload which may lead to endothelial dysfunction (ED), the earliest marker of atherosclerosis. Nailfold videocapillaroscopy (NVC) technique can detect ED on microcirculation. Using NVC, we aimed to demonstrate if metabolic alterations evoked by high-fat meals can act differently on microvascular endothelial reactivity in lean and women with obesity.MethodsWomen, aged between 19 and 40 years, were allocated to control group (CG) and with obesity group (OBG) and were subjected to blood analysis for determination of glucose, total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c) and NVC evaluation at fasting and 30, 60, 120, and 180-min after high-fat meal ingestion. NVC technique evaluated microvascular reactivity through the following variables: red blood cell velocity (RBCV) at rest and after 1-min ischemia (maximal red blood cell velocity, RBCVmax) and time taken to reach it (TRBCVmax). A P value ≤0.05 was considered significant.ResultsHigh-fat meal promoted a two-phase response in both groups: one until 60-min, associated with glucose and insulin levels, and the other after 120-min, associated with TG levels. Significant differences between groups were observed concerning insulin and HDL-c concentrations only at fasting and TC, TG, and LDL-c levels in all-time points. Regarding microvascular reactivity, RBCV, RBCVmax, and TRBCVmax were significantly different in OBG at 30-min compared to baseline. RBCVmax and TRBCVmax were significantly different in CG at 30-min and 60-min comparing to fasting. In all-time points, OBG presented RBCV, RBCVmax , and TRBCVmax significantly different in comparison to CG.ConclusionHigh-fat meal worsened ED on microcirculation in women with obesity and induced impairment of endothelial function in lean ones, reinforcing the association between high-fat meal and atherosclerosis.

Project description:The Five Freedoms have had major impact on animal welfare thinking internationally. However, despite clear initial statements that the words 'freedom from' should indicate 'as free as possible from', the Freedoms have come to be represented as absolute or fundamental freedoms, even rights, by some animal advocate and other groups. Moreover, a marked increase in scientific understanding over the last two decades shows that the Freedoms do not capture the more nuanced knowledge of the biological processes that is germane to understanding animal welfare and which is now available to guide its management. For example, the named negative experiences of thirst, hunger, discomfort and pain, and others identified subsequently, including breathlessness, nausea, dizziness, debility, weakness and sickness, can never be eliminated, merely temporarily neutralised. Each one is a genetically embedded element that motivates animals to behave in particular ways to obtain specific life-sustaining resources, avoid or reduce physical harm or facilitate recovery from infection or injury. Their undoubted negativity creates a necessary sense of urgency to respond, without which animals would not survive. Also, the temporary neutralisation of these survival-critical affects does not in and of itself generate positive experience. This questions the commonly held assumption that good animal welfare will result when these internally generated negative affects are minimised. Animals may also experience other negative affects that include anxiety, fear, panic, frustration, anger, helplessness, loneliness, boredom and depression. These situation-related affects reflect animals' perceptions of their external circumstances. Although they are elicited by threatening, cramped, barren and/or isolated conditions, they can often be replaced by positive affects when animals are kept with congenial others in spacious, stimulus-rich and safe environments which provide opportunities for them to engage in behaviours they find rewarding. These behaviours may include environment-focused exploration and food acquisition activities as well as animal-to-animal interactive activities, all of which can generate various forms of comfort, pleasure, interest, confidence and a sense of control. Animal welfare management should aim to reduce the intensity of survival-critical negative affects to tolerable levels that nevertheless still elicit the required behaviours, and should also provide opportunities for animals to behave in ways they find rewarding, noting that poor management of survival-critical affects reduces animals' motivation to utilize such rewarding opportunities. This biologically more accurate understanding provides support for reviewing the adequacy of provisions in current codes of welfare or practice in order to ensure that animals are given greater opportunities to experience positive welfare states. The purpose is to help animals to have lives worth living, which is not possible when the predominant focus of such codes is on survival-critical measures. Finally, an updated characterisation of animal welfare that incorporates this more accurate understanding is presented.

Dataset Information

Is human life worth peanuts? Risk attitude changes in accordance with varying stakes.

Publications

Is human life worth peanuts? Risk attitude changes in accordance with varying stakes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets