Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In cross-cultural psychology, uncertainty avoidance is how cultures differ on the amount of tolerance they have of unpredictability. [1] Uncertainty avoidance is one of five key qualities or dimensions measured by the researchers who developed the Hofstede model of cultural dimensions to quantify cultural differences across international lines and better understand why some ideas and business ...
Hofstede & Bond (1984) define uncertainty avoidance as "the degree to which people feel threatened by ambiguous situations, and have created beliefs and institutions that try to avoid these." [ 18 ] Stephan & Renfro (2002) thus suggest that cultures which hold norms and laws as very important are likely to perceive threat from "unfamiliar groups."
Uncertainty avoidance (UAI): The uncertainty avoidance index is defined as "a society's tolerance for ambiguity", in which people embrace or avert an event of something unexpected, unknown, or away from the status quo. Societies that score a high degree in this index opt for stiff codes of behavior, guidelines, laws, and generally rely on ...
In decision theory and economics, ambiguity aversion (also known as uncertainty aversion) is a preference for known risks over unknown risks. An ambiguity-averse individual would rather choose an alternative where the probability distribution of the outcomes is known over one where the probabilities are unknown.
Uncertainty avoidance is a way of coping with uncertainty. Society copes using technology, law and religion/ritual, along either a rational (technology, law) or non-rational (religion/ritual). Hofstede cited rituals including memos and reports, some parts of accounting systems, parts of planning and control systems, and the invocation of experts.
Anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory is known as the high levels of anxiety one may experience as they come in contact with those of another culture.This concept was first introduced by William B. Gudykunst to further define how humans effectively communicate based on their anxiety and uncertainty in social situations.
The agent then tries to satisfice the expected utility and maximize the robustness against uncertainty in the imprecise probabilities. This robust-satisficing approach can be developed explicitly to show that the choices of decision-makers should display precisely the preference reversal that Ellsberg observed.
Examples include the Cambodian genocide, the Final Solution in Nazi Germany, the Rwandan genocide, the Armenian genocide, and the genocide of the Hellenes. This scale should not be confused with the Religious Orientation Scale of Allport and Ross (1967), which is a measure of the maturity of an individual's religious conviction.