Psychology Today January February 2008 Ways We Get The Odd ✓ Solved

96 Psychology Today January/February 2008 WAYS WE GET THE O D D

Our minds are flummoxed by modern threats. How to spot real risks—and know when you’re just fooling yourself.

Fear and emotion are inseparable. Fear feels like anything but a cool and detached computation of the odds. But that’s precisely what it is, a lightning-fast risk assessment performed by your reptilian brain, which is ever on the lookout for danger. The amygdala flags perceptions, sends out an alarm message, and—before you have a chance to think—your system gets flooded with adrenaline.

Risk and emotion interact in unpredictable ways. As Paul Slovic notes, emotions are decision-making shortcuts. As a result of these evolved emotional algorithms, ancient threats like spiders and snakes cause fear out of proportion to the real danger they pose, while experiences that should frighten us—like fast driving—don’t. Dangers such as speedy motorized vehicles are newcomers on the landscape of life. The instinctive response to being approached rapidly is to freeze, which reduces a predator’s ability to see you—but that doesn’t help when what’s speeding toward you is a car.

Perception of Risk and Its Implications

Research indicates that fear skews risk analysis in predictable ways. Because fear strengthens memory, catastrophes such as earthquakes, plane crashes, and terrorist incidents completely capture our attention. As a result, we overestimate the odds of dreadful but infrequent events and underestimate how risky ordinary events are. The drama and excitement of improbable events make them appear more common.

This effect is amplified by the sensationalism inherent in media coverage. The more we see something, the more common we think it is, even if we are watching the same footage repeatedly. Following 9/11, 1.4 million people altered their holiday travel plans to avoid flying, opting instead for driving, which is statistically far more dangerous. This switch caused approximately 1,000 additional auto fatalities, according to two separate analyses comparing traffic patterns in late 2001 to those the year before.

Substituting One Risk for Another

Individuals often substitute one risk for another, leading to paradoxical outcomes. For instance, insurers in the UK once offered discounts to drivers who purchased cars with safer features. However, this did not result in fewer accidents; rather, it led to different accidents. Buoyed by the false sense of safety brought about by enhanced control mechanisms in their vehicles, drivers of four-wheel-drive vehicles tend to take more risks. Therefore, features designed to enhance safety—like seatbelts or airbags—can lead to increased overall risk.

Teenage Decision-Making

Teenagers may have a unique approach to risk evaluation. Contrary to parental worries that teens feel invulnerable and disregard consequences, some studies suggest that teens often overestimate the odds of negative outcomes. This perception encourages them to evaluate risks through more rational, analytical processes rather than the emotionally driven responses often utilized by adults. Consequently, this suggests that education around risk assessment should focus on building emotional judgment and situational awareness, rather than purely rational decision-making.

Conclusion

Understanding how our perception of risks is influenced by emotions and cognitive biases can help mitigate anxiety related to perceived threats. The implications extend beyond personal peace of mind; they influence public health policies and personal choices. Recognizing the dissonance between actual risks and perceived ones can lead to more informed and safer decision-making in daily life.

References

• Slovic, P. (2000). The Perception of Risk. London: Earthscan Publications.
• Reyna, V. F. (2008). Risk and Rational Decision Making in Adolescents. Developmental Review, 28(1), 162-171.
• Thompson, K. (2007). Risk Analysis in Public Health: A New Approach. Harvard School of Public Health Journal.
• Ropeik, D. (2012). How Risky Is It, Really? Why Our Fears Don't Always Match the Facts. New York: Amacom.
• Fischhoff, B. (2005). Risk: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.
• Perry, B. D. (2006). The Neurodevelopmental Impact of Psychological Trauma. Child Trauma Academy.
• National Transportation Safety Board. (2002). Report on Airline Safety Post 9/11. NTSB Publications.
• CDC. (2020). National Vital Statistics Reports. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
• Adams, J. (2008). Risk Compensation: The Effect of Safety Features on Drivers' Behavior. Journal of Risk Analysis.
• Szalavitz, M. (2008). The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog: And Other Stories from a Child Psychiatrist’s Notebook. New York: HarperCollins.