János Boros

Bio: János Boros is an academic researcher from The Catholic University of America. The author has contributed to research in topics: Affect heuristic & Expected loss. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications receiving 17 citations.

Risk-taking in entrepreneurs, compared to criminals and students: The role of uncertainty and stakes ☆

Abstract: Entrepreneurs’, college students’ and criminals’ risk-taking were compared in hypothetical bet situations. The level of uncertainty and the amount staked were varied in gain and loss situations. Potential profit motivates entrepreneurs to choose higher stakes, expected loss will prompt the avoidance of risk. In profit-making situations, college students’ strategies are different: Students’ decisions are more influenced by probability factors than by the amount staked. Risk-taking tendency of criminals is higher than that of the other two groups, without applying a consistent strategy in taking risk.

Prospects behind bars: Analyzing decisions under risk in a prison population

Abstract: Criminal activity often involves considerable risks. It is therefore not surprising that criminals have been speculated to differ from noncriminals in risk attitude. Yet, few data exist to support this assumption. Moreover, the psychological underpinnings of differences in risk attitude are currently little understood. We presented prisoners and controls with sets of risky decision tasks and modeled their responses using cumulative prospect theory (CPT). The two groups showed several differences. Prisoners were more risk seeking than nonprisoners in lotteries involving losses, but they were less risk seeking in lotteries involving high-probability gains. Bestfitting CPT parameters indicated a reduced sensitivity to outcomes, for both gains and losses, and a stronger loss aversion among prisoners. In addition, prisoners showed a diminished sensitivity to the probability of gains. Our results contribute to a better understanding of prisoners’ risk attitudes and the underlying mechanisms that distinguish prisoners from nonprisoners and may thus help improve interventions designed to prevent crime.

A comparison of the risk‐taking behaviors of prisoners and non‐prisoners

Abstract: Do prisoners and non-prisoners differ in their risk-taking behavior and the domains where they take risks? Surprisingly little psychological research has addressed these questions, despite the well-established paradigms and extensive literature on risk taking among non-prison populations. To fill this gap, we used the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking Scale to compare 75 male prisoners' and 75 male non-prisoners' risk-taking behavior, risk perception, and risk benefit in five domains (ethical, financial, health, recreational, and social). Our results show that prisoners and non-prisoners did not differ in their risk-taking behavior in the ethical, financial, recreational, or social domains. In the health domain, however, prisoners exhibited significantly higher risk-taking tendencies. With regard to risk perception, prisoners perceived activities as significantly more risky than non-prisoners, aside from the financial domain where non-prisoners reported significantly higher risk perception. In all five domains, prisoners perceived risk-taking activities as offering fewer benefits compared to the non-prisoner sample. Our results also indicate that risk-taking activities are better predicted by the expected benefits than by risk perception for both prisoners and non-prisoners in the recreational, financial, and ethical domains. However, for prisoners, risk taking in the social domain increased with level of perceived benefit. In the health domain, prisoners' risk taking decreased with increasing level of perceived risk, whereas for non-prisoners, perceived benefits, but not risk perception, predicted risk taking. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Forfeiture of Illegal Gains, Attempts and Implied Risk Preferences

Abstract: In the law enforcement literature there is a presumption – supported by some experimental and econometric evidence – that criminals are more responsive to increases in the certainty than the severity of punishment. Under a general set of assumptions, this implies that criminals are risk seeking. We show that this implication is no longer valid when forfeiture of illegal gains and the possibility of unsuccessful attempts are considered. Therefore, when drawing inferences concerning offenders’ risk attitudes based on their responses to various punishment schemes, special attention must be paid to whether and to what extent offenders’ illegal gains can be forfeited and whether increases in the probability of punishment affect the probability of attempts being successful. We discuss policy implications related to our observations.

Forfeiture of Illegal Gains, Attempts, and Implied Risk Preferences

Abstract: In the law enforcement literature there is a presumption—supported by some experimental and econometric evidence—that criminals are more responsive to increases in the certainty than the severity of punishment. Under a general set of assumptions, this implies that criminals are risk seeking. We show that this implication is no longer valid when forfeiture of illegal gains and the possibility of unsuccessful attempts are considered. Therefore, when drawing inferences concerning offenders’ attitudes toward risk based on their responses to various punishment schemes, special attention must be paid to whether and to what extent offenders’ illegal gains can be forfeited and whether increases in the probability of punishment affect the probability of attempts being successful. We discuss policy implications related to our observations.

When opportunity matters: comparing the risk-taking attitudes of prisoners and recently released ex-prisoners.

Abstract: Risk-taking tendencies and environmental opportunities to commit crime are two key features in understanding criminal behavior. Upon release from prison, ex-prisoners have a much greater opportunity to engage in risky activity and to commit criminal acts. We hypothesized that ex-prisoners would exhibit greater risk-taking tendencies compared to prisoners who have fewer opportunities to engage in risky activity and who are monitored constantly by prison authorities. Using cumulative prospect theory to compare the risky choices of prisoners and ex-prisoners our study revealed that ex-prisoners who were within 16 weeks of their prison release made riskier choices than prisoners. Our data indicate that previous studies comparing prisoners behind bars with nonoffenders may have underestimated the risk-taking tendencies of offenders. The present findings emphasize the central role played by risk-taking attitudes in criminal offending and highlight a need to examine offenders after release from prison.