• Link to Youtube
  • Link to LinkedIn
Stanford Center on Longevity
  • ABOUT
    • GENERAL
      • About SCL
      • Annual Reports
      • Contact
    • PEOPLE
      • Leadership, Scholars & Staff
      • New Map of Life Impact Fellows
      • Faculty Affiliates
      • Advisory Council
      • SCL Ambassadors
    • AFFILIATED CENTERS
      • Stanford Distinguished Careers Institute
      • Glenn Foundation for Medical Research
      • Stanford Lifestyle Medicine
  • RESEARCH & INNOVATION
    • The New Map of Life Initiative
    • Postdoctoral Fellows Program
    • The Futures Project on Education and Learning for Longer Lives
    • The Sightlines Project
    • Longevity Design Challenge
    • Publications
  • MEDIA & EVENTS
    • SCL Magazine
    • Longevity Book Club
    • Century Summit
    • Century Lives Podcast
    • SCL in the News
    • Videos
  • ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES
    • Press inquiries
    • Postdoctoral Fellowship application
    • Industrial Affiliates Program
    • Stanford Courses
    • Make a gift
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

Rational Actors or Rational Fools? Implications of the Affect Heuristic for Behavioral Economics

Authors: Paul Slovic, Decision Research; Melissa L. Finucane, Center for Health Research, Hawaii; Ellen Peters, Decision Research; Donald G. MacGregor, Decision Research

Publication: American Institute for Economic Research (symposium paper)

Year: 2002

Focus Area: Decision Making, Prevention, Emotion

Relevance: This article presents a readable and comprehensive review of the affect heuristic – the tendency to rely upon positive or negative emotions to guide decision making – with many experimental examples. The section on judging risk may be especially useful in the fraud prevention field, as people tend to assume that low risk situations have high benefits, and vice versa.

Summary: “Using an overall, readily available affective impression can be far easier — more efficient — than weighing the pros and cons or retrieving from memory many relevant examples, especially when the required judgment or decision is complex or mental resources are limited.”

  • In most cases, people perceive high risk situations as having low potential benefit, and low risk situations as having high potential benefit. When time is limited, this relationship becomes even stronger.
  • Well-known and dreaded hazards (i.e. cancer) are seen as riskier than less dreaded hazards (i.e. accidents).

Author Abstract: This paper introduces a theoretical framework that describes the importance of affect in guiding judgments and decisions. As used here, “affect” means the specific quality of “goodness” or “badness” (i) experienced as a feeling state (with or without consciousness) and (ii) demarcating a positive or negative quality of a stimulus. Affective responses occur rapidly and automatically — note how quickly you sense the feelings associated with the stimulus word “treasure” or the word “hate.” We shall argue that reliance on such feelings can be characterized as “the affect heuristic.” We will trace the development of the affect heuristic across a variety of research paths and discuss some of the important practical implications resulting from ways that this heuristic impacts our daily lives.

Full Article

https://longevity.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/SCL-Logo-1-300x118.png 0 0 admin https://longevity.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/SCL-Logo-1-300x118.png admin2011-02-04 18:35:432011-02-04 18:35:43Rational Actors or Rational Fools? Implications of the Affect Heuristic for Behavioral Economics
 

© Copyright - Stanford Center on Longevity
  • Link to Youtube
  • Link to LinkedIn
Link to: Investment Behavior and the Negative Side of Emotion Link to: Investment Behavior and the Negative Side of Emotion Investment Behavior and the Negative Side of Emotion Link to: The Affect Heuristic Link to: The Affect Heuristic The Affect Heuristic
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top