National leaders confront risky decisions on a regular basis. Although
leaders may differ widely in their tolerance for risk, students of fo
reign policymaking lack compelling explanations for these differences.
One of the few attempts to grapple with this problem holds that decis
ion makers accept risks to avoid losses but refuse to take risks to ma
ke comparable gains. This tendency, embodied in prospect theory, is ex
perimentally robust but consistently fails to predict the behavior of
one third or more of the subjects. To investigate the contribution of
individual differences to risk taking, the authors administered three
questionnaires assessing risk propensity and two personality inventori
es (the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and the Revised NEO Personality In
ventory) to 126 subjects. The results identify strong personality pred
ictors of generalized risk taking. Contrary to prospect theory, some p
eople were especially willing to take risks to make gains, whereas oth
ers were particularly unlikely to take risks when facing potential los
ses. Statistical analyses lend support to a three-stage model of risk
taking. The findings suggest that if students of international conflic
t want to understand risk taking, then they must consider not only how
leaders frame conflicts but also the character of the leaders themsel
ves.