Chronic stress skews decision toward high-risk/high-benefit

Martinghoul · Nov 20, 2017

sle said:
The time/volatility incentive is an interesting hypothesis. To summarize, you’re equating uncertainty with stress (a reasonable thought). It’s perfectly sensible to maximize the current payoff if the future payouts are less probable.

I think that's kinda been my point as well. If you're stressed (especially, chronically), it's reasonable to expect that you might soon be dead. In which case current payoff is all you care about and risk associated with it doesn't really matter.

sle · Nov 25, 2017

Martinghoul said:
If you're stressed (especially, chronically), it's reasonable to expect that you might soon be dead.

Do you think that's true in our case? :banghead:

Martinghoul · Nov 25, 2017

sle said:
Do you think that's true in our case?

Well, I shirley hope not...

johnnyrock · Dec 4, 2017

sle said:
Just came across this in Cell: http://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(17)31239-4

Besides a few interesting neuroscience ideas (I am still working through them), behavioral conclusions were as follows:
(a) chronic stress decreases ability for proper cost-benefit analysis
(b) it increases propensity to chose high risk, high payoff options
I felt that (A) is logical, but (B) was unexpected and contradicts the standard idea of loss aversion.

That is not necessarily a bad thing. Our founding fathers, immigrants and every story that follows the Horatio Algo model shows the success that can follow even life threatening risk.

sle · Dec 5, 2017

johnnyrock said:
That is not necessarily a bad thing. Our founding fathers, immigrants and every story that follows the Horatio Algo model shows the success that can follow even life threatening risk.

I think there is selection bias hiding in these words somewhere

sle · Dec 8, 2017

Another study along the same lines, but this one correlates childhood stress with risk/reward evaluation in adults:
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/11/28/1708791114.full.pdf