active network espn

Currently Being Moderated

I have so much stuff backlogged to write about. Where to start? I’ll start back a couple of weekends.

 

The weekend of 3/13-15 was Women’s Weekend at Winter Park, Colorado organized by my long-time pal (high school buddy and college roomie) Mari Bergstrom (Huyler). Mari and I went skate skiing at Devil’s Thumb on Friday while the rest of the gang drove up. On Saturday, seven of us went snowmobiling. I’ll post photos later this week.

 

It was the snowmobile adventure that got me thinking about “risky” behavior and why some people want to push the throttle to the handle of the machine to see how fast it will go on the flats. This was in spite of warnings from the rental place that some of the big meadows have under-snow rivers that are open in small areas and hard to see at high speeds. Hitting one of these can cause the rider to auger the nose of the machine into the river and send the rider flying into the air or smashing into the front of the snowmobile – usually breaking body and equipment. Other riders liked to explore through the trees on fresh snow, not always certain of what is under the snow. Some tried “high marking” or driving the snowmobile directly up a relatively steep slope, then arching a turn downhill (avoiding tipping the machine over to the downhill side, getting it into an multiple-count side roll) to get a free-falling feeling for a few moments. Of course some try to go higher on the steep hill than anyone else. (Hence “high marking”.) Still others were perfectly happy staying on hard-packed trails and riding at speeds that were fast enough to give them a rush.

 

Actual experience on the snowmobile is not always the predictor for who will try different risky moves. I also suspect that the ones that tried so-called risky moves didn’t view them as all that risky. Or, maybe they did.

 

It turns out that scientists have found that risky behavior is part of our gene pool. There is a great article in the April issue of Outside magazine (one of my favorite magazines) this month titled “This is your brain on adventure.” A scientist from the University of Denver says, “Risk taking was important for the species and the individual.” Well, for some individuals anyway.

 

They have a nifty online test so you can find out your risk score. I did notice two of the questions were the same. I’m not sure if this was intentional or not. While many people consider any high score a good score, recall that the annual Darwin Awards are given to “salute the improvement of the human genome by honoring those who accidently remove themselves from it.”

 

In the front of the magazine, is a key noting that 0-2  is a range for miniature golfers, while a score of 10 is for base jumpers.

 

I took the test twice and by answering the duplicate question different and going with a coin flip on another answer, I scored 8. I went back via another e-mail address (can’t take the test twice with the same ISP number) answering the duplicate question the same and taking the other answer on the coin flip question and scored a 9. I think the 8 is a more realistic evaluation for my riskiness.

 

You? What was your score?

658 Views Tags: darwin_awards, risky_behavior, outside_magazine


Mar 23, 2009 6:17 PM Dave Newman Dave Newman    says:

I scored 7. There are some things I don't really have much interest in doing: parachuting comes to mind. But I wonder if it's just the risk that puts me off, or something else. It seems to me that this quiz can't distinguish between things that you don't want to do because the risk is too high from those that you don't want to do for other reasons.

 

The other thing to think about is the fact that human beings are not very good at risk assessment. If I remember it right, human beings fear infrequent but very dramatic events that are outside their control more than they fear frequent but undramatic events that are within their control, even if the statistics demonstrate that risk from the frequent event is greater than that from the infrequent event. For example, many fear airplane flights more than driving in a car, but most individuals are at greater risk of injury in a car crash than they are in an airplane crash.

Mar 24, 2009 7:45 AM Gale Bernhardt Gale Bernhardt    says in response to Dave Newman:

Yeah, I think there are several points for discussion on the quiz. It is probably severely truncated from the original tests, but from what I understood it is pretty good at assessing three main areas: 1) the desire for adventure or sensation seeking, 2) relative disregard for harm and 3) impulsivity - acting on desire without fully thinking out the consequences.



Several of the items on the quiz are things I've done in my past, but don't actively seek to do now. (Surfing, downhill skiing and water skiing). One might argue that those have been replaced by trials bike riding, snow boarding and mountain bike riding.



Also, I agree with you on risk assessment. For some of the people I talked to yesterday, it seems there is a justification process of sorts that "risky people" feel risk is reduced by the calculating odds that something "might" happen and just being prepared. The phrase "calculated risk" comes to mind.



A fun example is a person that I coach will often swim in lake near his house, even though there have been multiple alligator sightings. The odds, he says, are very, very low that he'll get attacked. I wouldn't want to swim in that lake. He didn't seem too crazy about running on trails that I run in the summer, where rattlesnake sightings are common.



I do know a couple of people that scored zero and the score does seem to fit.The column also said it is possible for people to score high on two of the three categories and lower on the third.


I like one of the last lines of the column, "...despite all the fancy scientific inroads, the call for adventure is still a big mystery."

Mar 24, 2009 10:35 PM SteveDouglas SteveDouglas    says:

I scored an 8.  If I were younger I might have answered some of the questions differently, but with age comes wisdom.     Being Part Klingon,  I still do "hear the cry of the Warrior", but it is faint. 

Mar 25, 2009 12:41 PM Gale Bernhardt Gale Bernhardt    says in response to SteveDouglas:

Yes, indeed age-obtained wisdom was mentioned in the column as well. In addition to age, having a family that depends on you did affect people's decision-making processes. The old, "think twice" comes to mind.

 

That cry didn't look too faint when you were throwing yourself downhill on some technical single track in about 8 inches of snow just a few weeks ago...