Risks are interwoven in most aspects of human behaviour – and actions going beyond the idea of complete control and safety of predictable outcomes may be understood as risky. We identify risk-taking as an essential activity to explore the world and ourselves – and on the other hand, too much of this exploration may lead us to throw away our safety. To understand the idea of risk psychologically we need to understand it in all its complexities.
Risk is at once an individual attribute and social phenomenon, a necessary action potential and a dangerous one. Risks may be present in the environment, may engulf us without any warning and may be understood as ever-present – the risk of an accident, the risk of nuclear war, the risk of natural disasters, the risk of death – all of these are there, everywhere and all the time – and perhaps in our anthropocentric occupation we may want to believe that we are in control of most of these risks – and we make great efforts to make out lives less ‘risky’ and more in ‘control’.
Read More: The Psychology of Risk-Taking
We congratulate ourselves for not worrying about the famines and floodings as our forefathers did, knowing that we have successfully eradicated the ‘risk’ of various diseases like smallpox, technological advancements are making sure to feel safer and can predict everything – even climate change and natural disasters. When we try to increase our control, we are essentially trying to eliminate risks. On the one hand risk elimination is an all-consuming activity and on the other the desire to experience the extraordinary – to break the mundane predictability, to explore and experience ourselves more we engage in risk-taking.
Risk-taking is celebrated and denigrated all at the same time – and therefore it becomes imperative to understand the complex (and simple) desires, social framework, internalised normative ideals, belief in one’s self and abilities, fears, and culture to understand the never-to-be-extinct human potential of risk-taking. Many philosophers, leaders and business heads have essentialised risk-taking as a desired and essential attribute in exploring our true potential and moving towards success.
Read More: How Taking Risks Leads to a More Creative and Fulfilling Life
When Einstein is quoted saying, ‘A ship is safe in its harbour – but that’s not what it’s built for’ or when Mark Zuckerberg inspires young minds with his prophetic ‘the biggest risk is not taking any risks’ we feel propelled towards living a fuller life, leaving the shores, and taking more ‘risks.’ There can be various apertures through which we may want to explore the understanding of risk-taking. Is taking risks thrilling? Does it make us feel more alive than what we may feel living in the confines of safety?
When we have warded off the dangers of death and disease, worked hard and earned ourselves financial security, ensured good health with routine diagnostics and strict diets, built homes with multiple layers of security and ensured elimination of all potential controllable risk factors we want to climb on a 300 feet high cliff, tie our lives to a rope and pay a hefty sum to feel the thrill to risk it all! Without really going into the neurobiological explanations of risk-taking (there is well-researched work on the structural and chemical changes that are induced -along with their satiating and addictive potential) I would like to explore the idea in the domain of self-exploration, understanding and growth. How risks help us uncover parts of ourselves, how the thrill defines our experiences and then understand if risk can be used to augment resilience.
Read More: Psychology behind Reckless Driving
Before deliberating any further on the idea of individuals as risk-takers we need to understand that this individual risk-taking is embedded in society – culture impacts risk perception and risk evaluation. Environment, socialisation, normative practices, familiarity, evaluation of one’s self and information available about the potential risk are among the many factors that influence risk-taking ability and behaviour. The temporal dimension of age and current life circumstances are additional factors that play an important role.
Climbing up and down hills, travelling alone through the jungle or bathing in a waterfall may not appear as risky to a young girl brought up and living in the hilly terrains of Sikkim as crossing a busy road. Mary Douglas, an anthropologist who has done significant work in the area of understanding risk-taking, describes culture as a ‘mnemonic system’ that helps people calculate risks and their consequences. Calculated risks then are safer, perhaps essential to enhancing the experience of self and aiding growth.
Read More: Why we fear Failure and How to Overcome it, According to Psychology
The recklessness of a risky behaviour even when done entirely for the thrill also has a calculation of perceived safety. This assurance of some safety, even though sometimes just perceived safety, makes it possible to take the risk. There is an important nuance that we must not miss here – there must be some danger (or the possibility of failure) and some element of non-normativity: an essential component that makes the risk-taking become a possibility for thrill-seeking – and yet there needs to be, however small – a possibility of success (or perceived safety).
Additionally, a greater focus on the immediate, usually positive, outcomes and a lesser focus on the longer-term, potentially more negative outcomes is associated with greater rates of involvement in risk-taking behaviours. It can also appear as choice impulsivity, which is evident when an individual chooses a smaller–sooner reward over a larger–later reward (Hamilton et al., 2015). Impulsivity—the tendency to act on a whim (Eysenck, 1993)—can also affect risky behaviours. Zukerman (2007) on the other hand argues risk-taking occurs whenever the benefits of some activity outweigh the potential hazards.
Read More: Psychology Behind Digital Arrests and CyberCrime, According to Experts
Resilience, just like risks, is built and influenced by the interactions between the individual and their environment. Michael Ungar (2013) defines resilience as the capacity of both the individual and their environment to optimize the possibility for individuals to help them navigate their way to the resources that will help them flourish. Risk and resilience (Panter-Brick, 2014) are important concepts to study from the perspective of self-assessment and growth potential.
We need to study it from the humane perspective without getting caught up in the actuarial definition of risks which will insist on statistical knowledge in generalisations. We need to steer clear of deterministic statements and labelling and understand risk and resilience as dynamic, culturally rotted, individually interpreted, and socially embedded concepts.
There will be no linear rules for enhancing resilience – though it may be safe to say that exposure to some risks and the ability to augment the possibilities of self-exploration and growth is sure to propel individuals towards better risk assessment and preparation. This in turn may aid in navigating one’s way towards the resources required to flourish thus contributing to resilience.
References +
Douglas, P. M., & Douglas, M. (2002). Risk and Blame: Essays in cultural theory. Taylor & Francis Group.
Eysenck, H. J. (1993). The nature of impulsivity. In W. G. McCown, J. L. Johnson, & M. B. Shure (Eds.), The impulsive client: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 57–69). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10500-004
Hamilton, K. R., Mitchell, M. R., Wing, V. C., Balodis, I. M., Bickel, W. K., Fillmore, M., Lane, S. D., Lejuez, C. W., Littlefield, A. K., Luijten, M., Mathias, C. W., Mitchell, S. H., Napier, T. C., Reynolds, B., Schütz, C. G., Setlow, B., Sher, K. J., Swann, A. C., Tedford, S. E., . . . Moeller, F. G. (2015). Choice impulsivity: Definitions, measurement issues, and clinical implications. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 6(2), 182–198. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000099
Panter-Brick, C. (2014). Health, Risk, and Resilience: Interdisciplinary Concepts and Applications. Annual Review of Anthropology, 43, 431–448.
Ungar, M. (2013). Resilience, Trauma, Context, and Culture. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 14(3), 255–266.
Zukerman, M. (2007). Sensation Seeking and Risky Behavior. Washington. American Psychological Association.
Leave feedback about this