Risk-taking behavior consequences

Death after the use of MDMA or MDEA is rare but may occur because of induction of cardiac arrhythmias or as a consequence of risk-taking behavior. Following its acute effects, MDMA may produce symptoms such as anxiety, depression, and confusion, which, in some cases, continue for several weeks (Dowling et al. 1987). 

A hazard that can result in a very serious injury is more likely to elicit compliance than a hazard that can only lead to a minor one. But there is much more to the evaluation of consequences. Is the company lax about incidents of noncompliance Does the worker have strong union protection Is the company located in a state with generous workers comp benefits These are not necessarily foremost in one s mind during a specific incident, but over time these factors can lead to more or less risk-taking behavior in general. 

Since the term "risk" is also used in connection with games or achievement, it seems appropriate to apply the term hazard risk as used by von Klebelsberg (1969), i.e., in those cases where hazards must be dealt with. The concept of risk has also been introduced into the behavioral sciences. Cohen used the concept "risk" as early as 1960 in connection with the subjective probability of undesired consequences. Risk-taking behavior is the designation for the readiness of individuals to expose themselves to danger. 

This principle offers another reason why people are not likely to follow safe operating procedures in the absence of external controls or behavior-consequence contingencies. As reflected in Principle 11, natural external consequences usually support risk-taking at the expense of safe alternatives which are usually more inconvenient, uncomfortable, or time consuming. 

All prescription drug abuse may lead to harmful consequences such as accidents, injuries, blackouts, legal problems, and unsafe sexual behavior, which can increase the risk of acquiring sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Specifically, each class of drugs has certain potentially life-threatening consequences of abuse. The abuse of opioids may lead to severe respiratory depression and inability to breathe, which can lead to death. Depressants may also cause respiratory depression and may lead to seizures if an addict suddenly stops taking them. Stimulants speed up the body s activities and raise blood pressure and heart rate, and when abused, may lead to a heart attack, stroke, or a seizure. Combinations... 

Multi-Attribute Utility Theory- MAUT is used to aggregate preference and consequence values amongst multiple dimensions taking into account the decision maker s preferences and his behavior, when considering cases of imcertainty and a clear measure of risk. 

So what is the role of the driver and other occupants in mitigating the consequences of a crash Actually their role is quite crucial. First, they must take advantage of the best restraint systems that will keep them in their seats when a crash occurs. Second, the driver must compensate for these benefits by engaging in high risk behaviors that can increase the likelihood of a crash, or the impact speed if a crash occurs. If we now recall the risk homeostasis hypothesis (see Chapter 3), this means that drivers must be convinced not to increase their speed because their car can help them survive high speed crashes that were unsurvivable 30 years ago. Unfortunately not everyone takes advantage of the belts, and some occupants who do, still don t get all the expected benefits. Who these drivers and occupants are, why they behave this way and what can we do about it is the focus of this chapter. 

We usually take calculated risks or shortcuts because we perceive the positive consequences of the at-risk behavior to be more powerful than the negative consequences. This is because the positive consequences of comfort, convenience, and efficiency are immediate and certain, while the negative consequences of at-risk behavior (such as an injury) are improbable and seem remote. Furthermore, the safe alternative is relatively inconvenient, uncomfortable, or inefficient—negative consequences that are both immediate and certain. As a result, we often need to add both activators and consequences to the situation to move people from conscious incompetence to conscious competence. 

Now suppose you do not buckle yom safety belt. Perhaps you divide your attention between the road and some other task like map reading, phone dialing, or cassette selecting. You know this behavior is unsafe, but you decide to take a calculated risk. Your judgment is faulty, as in a mistake, but xmlike a mistake, your at-risk behavior is deliberate. Such behavior does seem rational because it is not followed by a negative consequence and it is supported with perceived comfort, convenience, or efficiency. 

Competing with the lack of soon, certain, and sizable positive consequences for safe behaviors are soon, certain (and sometimes sizable) positive consequences for at-risk behaviors. Taking risks avoids the discomfort and inconvenience of most safe behaviors, and it often allows people to achieve their production and quality goals faster and easier. Supervisors sometimes activate and reward at-risk behaviors, unintentionally, of course, to achieve more production. Because activators and consequences are naturally available throughout our everyday existence to support at-risk behaviors in lieu of safe behaviors, safety can be considered a continuous fight with human nature (as discussed earlier in Section 2). 

As indicated previously, at-risk behavior is often followed by natural positive consequences. Short cuts are usually taken to save time and can lead to a faster rate of output. So taking on at-risk short cuts can be labeled "efficient" behavior. I have analyzed several... 

Behavior does not occur in a vacuum. Most people perform the way they do because they expect to achieve soon, certain, and positive consequences or they expect to avoid soon, certain, and negative consequences. People take calculated risks because they expect to gain something positive and/or avoid something negative. 

This is when an incentive-reward program is useful. Such a program attempts to motivate a certain target behavior by promising people a positive consequence if they perform it. The promise is the incentive and the consequence is the reward. In safety, this kind of motivational intervention is much less common than a disincentive-penalty program. This is when a rule, policy, or law threatens to give people a negative consequence (a penalty) if they fail to comply or take a calculated risk. 

Erom the perspective of considering cascading effects in the seismic risk assessment, the stochastic description of the seismic sequences (in particular by the ETAS model) has important consequences in probabilistic seismic hazard assessments, since it permits to take into account a more realistic behavior of the seismicity to calculate aftershock hazard curves, which is of fundamental importance for short-term hazard assessments. 

However, consequences are stronger than antecedents. If the belief that the consequences of accepting a risk are stronger than the consequences of following a safe course of action, then the behavior would be to take the short cut. To assess potential behavior, the types of consequences should be evaluated (Roughton Crutchfield, 2008 US DOE, 2002 Wendel, 2014). 

This case study highhghts how leadership, by stressing that the employees keep equipment running, created an unintended consequence that drove the employee behavior to take short cuts. The employees perception was that since few injuries had occurred, the risk of being caught in a piece of equipment was perceived as less than the consequences of deahng with leadership s constant pressure on production. 

---