ArticleScientific reports2026
General risk preference comes up short when predicting risk-taking frequency.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Thinking Through Parenthood: The Role of Intolerance of Uncertainty and Personality.Scandinavian journal of psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Situations involving risk are common in human affairs, from financial investments, criminal behavior, and health-related decisions. Peoples' self-reported risk preferences, where individuals in various ways report how they feel about risk, have been considered central to understanding why, and predict when, people behave differently in real-life situations involving risk. However, various other factors have also been suggested as predictors, including age, gender, education, income, anxiety, sensation seeking, impulsivity, and personality traits like neuroticism and extraversion. Still, research is limited on which factors best predict the frequency of risk-taking in real life. In this study, we asked respondents (n = 760) to report how often they engaged in various risk-taking behaviors along with the abovementioned variables with the aim of predicting risk-taking frequency. The results from Bayesian multi-model inference analyses showed that the most important predictors of risk-taking frequency were impulsivity, sensation seeking, health and social risk preferences, and gender. The study highlights the importance of examining multiple variables simultaneously when predicting risk-taking frequency. The importance of the concept of general risk-preference, which occupies a central role in many influential theories of risk-taking, should arguably be reconsidered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.