{"id":{"repo_id":"wfu","oai_identifier":"oai:wakespace.lib.wfu.edu:10339/39283"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/wfu/oai:wakespace.lib.wfu.edu:10339/39283","repository":{"repo_id":"wfu","name":"Wake Forest University","base_url":"https://wakespace.lib.wfu.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Self-Other Differences in Risky Decision Making: An Analysis of Social Values Theory and Construal-Level Theory","abstract":"This study seeks to explain self-other differences in decision making pertaining to risk through the comparison of social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008) and construal-level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010). Research has demonstrated that in comparison to decisions for the self, individuals tend to be more risk-taking when giving advice or deciding for others in low-impact relationship scenarios (Beisswanger, Stone, Hupp, & Allgaier, 2003). Social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008) proposes that advisers decide for others based on a social norm that emphasizes the importance of the social value. In contrast, construal level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010) suggests that individuals choose differently for others based on a higher-level mental construal that lends to more abstract thinking. Contrary to construal-level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010), manipulations of mental construal mindset and temporal distance had no impact on the riskiness of the decision outcome in a low-impact relationship scenario. In line with social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008), participants were riskier when making decisions for others than for themselves regardless of the mental mindset and temporal distance.","abstract_html":"This study seeks to explain self-other differences in decision making pertaining to risk through the comparison of social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008) and construal-level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010). Research has demonstrated that in comparison to decisions for the self, individuals tend to be more risk-taking when giving advice or deciding for others in low-impact relationship scenarios (Beisswanger, Stone, Hupp, & Allgaier, 2003). Social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008) proposes that advisers decide for others based on a social norm that emphasizes the importance of the social value. In contrast, construal level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010) suggests that individuals choose differently for others based on a higher-level mental construal that lends to more abstract thinking. Contrary to construal-level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010), manipulations of mental construal mindset and temporal distance had no impact on the riskiness of the decision outcome in a low-impact relationship scenario. In line with social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008), participants were riskier when making decisions for others than for themselves regardless of the mental mindset and temporal distance.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Palmer, Eleanor Catherine"],"institution":"Wake Forest University","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2014,"date_issued":"2014","date_published":"2014","updated_at":"2026-07-27T22:01:46Z","subjects":[],"languages":["en"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10339/39283","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Palmer, Eleanor Catherine"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-07-10T08:35:33Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-07-10T08:35:33Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2014"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Wake Forest University"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10339/39283"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This study seeks to explain self-other differences in decision making pertaining to risk through the comparison of social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008) and construal-level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010). Research has demonstrated that in comparison to decisions for the self, individuals tend to be more risk-taking when giving advice or deciding for others in low-impact relationship scenarios (Beisswanger, Stone, Hupp, & Allgaier, 2003). Social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008) proposes that advisers decide for others based on a social norm that emphasizes the importance of the social value. In contrast, construal level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010) suggests that individuals choose differently for others based on a higher-level mental construal that lends to more abstract thinking. Contrary to construal-level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010), manipulations of mental construal mindset and temporal distance had no impact on the riskiness of the decision outcome in a low-impact relationship scenario. In line with social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008), participants were riskier when making decisions for others than for themselves regardless of the mental mindset and temporal distance."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Self-Other Differences in Risky Decision Making: An Analysis of Social Values Theory and Construal-Level Theory"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Palmer, Eleanor Catherine"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-07-10T08:35:33Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-07-10T08:35:33Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2014"],"dc:description.abstract":["This study seeks to explain self-other differences in decision making pertaining to risk through the comparison of social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008) and construal-level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010). Research has demonstrated that in comparison to decisions for the self, individuals tend to be more risk-taking when giving advice or deciding for others in low-impact relationship scenarios (Beisswanger, Stone, Hupp, & Allgaier, 2003). Social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008) proposes that advisers decide for others based on a social norm that emphasizes the importance of the social value. In contrast, construal level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010) suggests that individuals choose differently for others based on a higher-level mental construal that lends to more abstract thinking. Contrary to construal-level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2010), manipulations of mental construal mindset and temporal distance had no impact on the riskiness of the decision outcome in a low-impact relationship scenario. In line with social value theory (Stone & Allgaier, 2008), participants were riskier when making decisions for others than for themselves regardless of the mental mindset and temporal distance."],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10339/39283"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:publisher":["Wake Forest University"],"dc:title":["Self-Other Differences in Risky Decision Making: An Analysis of Social Values Theory and Construal-Level Theory"],"dc:type":["Thesis"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-27T22:01:46Z"}