Beyond age and expertise: Emotional intelligence and heart rate variability predict decision-making under risk in mountain-guide population

Abstract

In high mountain environments, mountaineers regularly face decisions that put the physical integrity of all group members at risk, particularly in avalanche-prone terrain. These decisions, where consequences and probabilities are known, is called decision-making under risk. While knowledge and skills form the foundation of avalanche safety training, age and expertise may not be the only predictive factors. This study explored the influence of emotional intelligence (EI), vagally mediated heart rate variability (vmHRV) and inhibitory control on decision-making, in addition to age and expertise. Seventy male mountaineers (15-60 years) completed i) the Cambridge Gambling Task, a decision-making task that measured risk adjustment (RA) and risk management (RM), ii) an expertise questionnaire combining certification level and perceived expertise, iii) the Profile of Emotional Competence questionnaire, and iv) the Stop-Signal task assessing inhibitory control. We measured vmHRV at rest during 5 min. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses first tested Age and Expertise as baseline predictors, then evaluated the added predictive value of EI, vmHRV, and Inhibitory Control through model comparisons and effect size assessments. While no effects were found on RA, RM analysis revealed that EI and vmHRV improved prediction by 11.8 % compared to age and expertise alone. Global emotional competencies and heart-brain vagal interactions proved crucial in mountaineers' decision-making under risk, unlike inhibitory control. These findings suggest that emotional competencies play a role in risk management decisions in controlled settings, which may have implications for mountaineers' training programs, and highlight the potential of physiological markers as additional indicators of decision-making tendencies under risk.

Cite this work

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

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1 citations exist upstream.

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