Several firms make business decisions based on risk specifications or estimates provided by domain-experts. But research on whether the format of risk specifications systematically affects decision making in multi-dimensional environments is scarce. We show using laboratory experiments that subjective valuations of multi-dimensional projects are highly sensitive to the format of risk specifications. We considered a technology project that has two dimensions each with an associated risk, and would be considered a success when favorable outcomes occur on both dimensions. Participants were provided with the probabilities of success for each dimension, in two different specifications. In the simple risk specification, each probability was specified as a point estimate. In the compound risk specification, each probability was specified as a two-point distribution. The data show that decision-making under compound specifications is subject to two biases in processing conjunctive events and compound risk specifications; these biases act in opposite directions, and as outcome, judgmental valuations for the technology are closer to the true value with compound risk specification versus with simple risk specification. These results have an important implication for communicating risk: when compound risk specifications are available for multiple risks, substituting them with simple risk specifications leads to an overly optimistic outlook during decision-making.

中文翻译：

---

复合和简化规范对具有多重风险的项目评估的影响

几家公司根据风险规范或领域专家提供的估计来制定业务决策。但是，关于风险规范的格式是否会系统地影响多维环境中的决策的研究很少。我们使用实验室实验表明，多维项目的主观评估对风险规范的格式高度敏感。我们考虑了一个技术项目，该项目具有两个维度，每个维度都有相关的风险，并且当在两个维度上都产生有利的结果时，该项目将被视为成功。在两个不同的规格中，为参与者提供了每个维度成功的概率。在简单风险规范中，每个概率都指定为一个点估计。在复合风险规范中，每个概率都指定为两点分布。数据表明，复合规范下的决策在处理合并事件和复合风险规范方面存在两个偏见；这些偏差作用方向相反，结果，复合风险说明与简单风险说明相比，对该技术的判断价值更接近真实值。这些结果对于传达风险具有重要意义：当复合风险规范可用于多种风险时，用简单的风险规范替代它们会导致在决策过程中过分乐观。这些偏见的作用方向相反，结果，复合风险说明与简单风险说明相比，该技术的判断价值更接近真实值。这些结果对于传达风险具有重要意义：当复合风险规范可用于多种风险时，用简单的风险规范替代它们会导致在决策过程中过分乐观。这些偏差作用方向相反，结果，复合风险说明与简单风险说明相比，对该技术的判断价值更接近真实值。这些结果对于传达风险具有重要意义：当复合风险规范可用于多种风险时，用简单的风险规范替代它们会导致在决策过程中过分乐观。