In this paper the authors argue that simulators are a useful and valid environment for conducting research into RHT (risk homeostasis theory). They consider that simulators offer significant advantages over studies conducted in natural settings. First, simulator studies are able to benefit from all of the advantages normally associated with laboratory research, such as control over independent variables, limitation on the number of independent variables, control over environmental variables, control over participants' behaviour, event sampling at choice, construction of complete experimental designs, choice of representative or random samples, systematic manipulation of variables, systematic development of a series of studies eliminating specified sources of variability, simplification of data to a level manageable by existing theoretical power, partitioning of subject effects, systematisation of error, capacity for repeated longitudinal measurement over time, planning in advance and replication. Second, simulators are able to collapse experience, thus enabling feed-back to participants to occur over a very short time scale. The authors suggest that the reason compensation can take years may simply be a function of delayed feed-back. Finally, they believe that they have demonstrated that people can only compensate for changes in the levels of extrinsic risk when they are free to exercise a high degree of personal choice over their risk taking behaviours (Stanton & Glendon, 1996).
Abstract