Julia Brailovskaia1, Holger Schillack2, Hans-Jörg Assion3, Helmut Horn4, Jürgen Margraf2. 1. Mental Health Research and Treatment Center, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Massenbergstr. 9-13, 44787 Bochum, Germany. Electronic address: Julia.Brailovskaia@rub.de. 2. Mental Health Research and Treatment Center, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Massenbergstr. 9-13, 44787 Bochum, Germany. 3. Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe (LWL)-Clinic Dortmund, Marsbruchstr. 179, 44287 Dortmund, Germany. Electronic address: Hans-Joerg.Assion@lwl.org. 4. Knappschaftskrankenhaus Clinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Dortmund, Volksgartenstr. 40, 44388 Dortmund, Germany. Electronic address: Helmut.Horn@klinikum-westfalen.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Earlier research in South Africa (Szrek et al., 2012) confirmed the one-item Dohmen measure (Dohmen et al., 2011) to be a significant predictor of risky health behavior. METHODS: The present study investigated the relationship of the Dohmen measure with other measures of risk-taking propensity (e.g., Domain-Specific Risk-Taking scale), and its predictive power for smoking, problematic drinking, problematic car driving, and problematic sexual behavior, in a sample of 63 patients of psychiatric clinics and 102 healthy participants in Germany. RESULTS: The Dohmen measure was significantly positively related to other involved instruments. It served as predictor of two of the four investigated risky health activities (i.e., smoking, problematic drinking). CONCLUSIONS: The Dohmen measure seems to be a valid and time efficient instrument to assess general risk-taking propensity, as well as specific propensity for smoking and problematic drinking in Germany.
BACKGROUND: Earlier research in South Africa (Szrek et al., 2012) confirmed the one-item Dohmen measure (Dohmen et al., 2011) to be a significant predictor of risky health behavior. METHODS: The present study investigated the relationship of the Dohmen measure with other measures of risk-taking propensity (e.g., Domain-Specific Risk-Taking scale), and its predictive power for smoking, problematic drinking, problematic car driving, and problematic sexual behavior, in a sample of 63 patients of psychiatric clinics and 102 healthy participants in Germany. RESULTS: The Dohmen measure was significantly positively related to other involved instruments. It served as predictor of two of the four investigated risky health activities (i.e., smoking, problematic drinking). CONCLUSIONS: The Dohmen measure seems to be a valid and time efficient instrument to assess general risk-taking propensity, as well as specific propensity for smoking and problematic drinking in Germany.