• 0 Posts
  • 4 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 1st, 2024

help-circle
  • Yes. That wasn’t the best word choice; maybe “group” would have been better. I meant groups of people who are willing to take some level of risk. Imagine the categories are “low risk takers”, “medium risk takers”, and “high risk takers”.

    Compared to A paying out $40, if you make B $50-n you’ll only get the high risk takers choosing B. If you make it $70-n you’ll get high and medium risk takers. If you make it $120-n you’ll get almost everybody.

    If risk taking is a value between 0 and 1, the categories are groups of people inside certain intervals. For example, low could be [0, 1/3), medium could be [1/3, 2/3), and high could be [2/3, 1].


  • Hammocks4All@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlJust one more lane
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I once heard of an experiment in economics that offers insight into this.

    Say you have 100 people. You give each of them one of two choices:

    A : you get $40 unconditionally B: you get $70 - n, where n is the number of people who choose B

    You end up getting, on average across experiments, n = 30.

    If you move the numbers around (i.e, the $40 and the $70), you keep getting, on average, a number of people choosing B so that B pays out the same as A.

    I think the interpretation is that people can be categorized by the amount of risk they’re willing to take. If you make B less risky, you’ll get a new category of people. If you make it more risky, you’ll lose categories.

    Applied to traffic, opening up a new lane brings in new categories of people who are willing to risk the traffic.

    Or something. Sorry I don’t remember it better and am too lazy to look it up. Pretty pretty cool though.