Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 22, 2025

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
Published on: September 19, 2012
Risk-relativity is still a nonsense
Neil John Pickering1, Giles Newton-Howes2, Simon Walker3
1Bioethics Centre, Dunedin School of Medicine, Dunedin, New Zealand neil.pickering@otago.ac.nz.
Abstract:
In this short response to Gray's article Capacity and Decision Making we double down on our argument that risk-relativity is a nonsense. Risk relativity is the claim that we should set a higher standard of competence for a person to make a risky choice than to make a safe choice. Gray's response largely involves calling attention to the complexities, ramifications and multiple value implications of decision-making, but we do not deny any of this. Using the notion of quality of care mentioned by Gray, we construct an argument that might be used to support risk relativity. But it is no more persuasive than the arguments put forward by risk-relativists.
Related Concept Videos
Relative Risk
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Hazard Rate
Odds Ratio
Framing Effects
The Scientific Method

