Investigating the operation of the affect heuristic: is it an associative construct?

Ellen Townsend · Alexa Spence · Sarah E. Knowles

15 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Risk Research

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics Social and Intergroup Psychology Risk Perception and Management

Abstract

Affect is of central importance in risk perception and risky decision-making, and the affect heuristic is a very influential construct developed in relation to this. We examined whether this heuristic operates at an associative level of processing as, despite much theorising, empirical evidence on this issue is lacking. We compared affective heuristic task performance with performance on established implicit association tasks. Participants (n = 151) completed explicit attitude and risk measures, and five experimental tasks (three Go/No-Go Association Tasks (GNAT), a priming task and a time-pressured affect heuristic task). A modified ‘risk-benefit’ GNAT provided a speeded analogue of the affect heuristic task which was equivalent to the evaluative GNAT in terms of response mode and cognitive effort. Affect heuristic task performance was not associated with implicit task performance. The evaluative GNAT did not correlate with the risk-benefit GNAT (speeded affect heuristic task). However, affect heuristic task performance was strongly associated with, and significantly predicted by, explicit affective attitude and explicit risk measures suggesting that this heuristic may primarily reflect deliberative rather than associative processing. Findings contradict the (much cited) notion that this important psychological construct operates at an associative level. However, the conclusions that can be drawn from this study are limited by the implicit attitude measures used here. In future research, it would be desirable to use different measures of implicit associations, e.g. the Single-Category Implicit Association task, to further interrogate the processes operating within the affect heuristic.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 15 citations exist upstream.

References

1998Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test.1998Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test.1980Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences.2004Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality 2001Fear, anger, and risk.2000Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgement and choice 2000The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits 2006Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change.

Cited by

2014On the relationship between personal experience, affect and risk perception:The case of climate change 2016Determinants and Measurement of Climate Change Risk Perception, Worry, and Concern

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.