DOI: 10.5061/dryad.wpzgmsc0f
title: Data from: People who are more likely to die care less about the future: Life insurance risk ratings predict personality

description: Adaptationist models predict that individuals at higher risk of death will
 be calibrated to prioritize immediate over future benefits. However,
 operationalizing individual mortality risk in empirical studies has proven
 challenging. We introduce and explore a novel method of operationalizing
 individual mortality risk: Using the risk ratings assigned by actuaries to
 purchasers of individual life insurance policies. Participants, who had
 recently gone through underwriting as part of the insurance application
 process, completed self-report instruments to assess personality traits
 related to present-future tradeoffs and a putative fast-slow continuum of
 life history strategy. Study 1 (n = 270) found that insurance-based
 mortality risk associated negatively with a measure of slow life strategy
 and positively with a measure of short-term mating orientation. Study 2 (n
 = 402), which was preregistered, found that insurance-based mortality risk
 associated positively with impulsivity and negatively with
 conscientiousness and consideration of future consequences. Self-estimated
 mortality risk did not track insurance-based mortality risk, but was
 independently correlated with the same personality traits. We discuss the
 potential of insurance-based mortality risk estimates in behavioral
 research and the significance of these findings for adaptationist models
 of individual differences.
description: # Mortality risk estimates from life insurance policies predict individual
 differences in human behavioral traits --- Data were collected from two
 U.S. online participant samples (N = 270 and N = 402), screened to include
 only individuals who had purchased individual life insurance policies
 within the past five years. In both data sets, participants were asked for
 the risk ratings they had been assigned by the insurance company, and to
 complete self-report instruments measuring constructs relevant to
 psychometric life history (especially the present-future trade-off). In
 the second data set, participants were also asked to indicate their
 self-estimated lifespan, and were asked to complete three instruments
 measuring recalled childhood environmental harshness. R code used to
 analyze the data is also provided. ## Description of the Data and file
 structure #### Lukaszewski-Manson-Study-1-R.csv Key to column headings
 female: 1 = yes age_bin: (1 = younger than 25 years, 2 = 25-29, 3 = 30-34,
 4 = 35-39, 5 = 40-44, 6 = 45-49, 7 = 50-54, 8 = 55-59, 9 = 60-64, 10 =
 65-69, 11 = 70-74, 12 = 75 and older) income (current household income):
 (1 = Less than $5,000, 2 = $5,000 - $9,999, 3 = $10,000 - $14,999, 4 =
 $15,000 - $19,999, 5 = $20,000 - $29,999, 6 = $30,000 - $39,999, 7 =
 $40,000 - $49,999, 8 = $50,000 - $59,999, 9 = $60,000 - $74,999, 10 =
 $75,000 - $99,999, 11 = $100,000 - $149,999, 12 = $150,000 or more) race:
 (1 = American Indian or Alaska Native, 2 = Asian, 3 = Native-Hawaiian/
 Pacific Islander, 4 = Black, 5 = White, Non-Hispanic, 6 = Hispanic, 7 =
 Multi-Racial, 8 = Other) policy amount (in U.S. dollars) original risk
 code: 0 = Select Preferred (or equivalent), 1 = Preferred (or equivalent),
 2 = Standard (non-tobacco), 3 = Preferred Tobacco, 4 = Tobacco, 5 =
 Substandard (non-tobacco), 6 = Substandard (tobacco) lhrf (Life history
 rating scale): 8-point scale anchored by 1 = “Extremely NOT descriptive of
 me” and 8 = “Extremely descriptive of me.” soi (Sociosexual orientation
 inventory): 8-point scale anchored by 1 = “Extremely NOT descriptive of
 me” and 8 = “Extremely descriptive of me.” Mortality risk estimates from
 life insurance policies predict individual differences in human behavioral
 traits Joseph H. Manson Aaron W. Lukaszewski ####
 Lukaszewski-Manson-Study-2-R.csv Key to column headings female: 1 = yes
 age_bin: (1 = younger than 25 years, 2 = 25-29, 3 = 30-34, 4 = 35-39, 5 =
 40-44, 6 = 45-49, 7 = 50-54, 8 = 55-59, 9 = 60-64, 10 = 65-69, 11 = 70-74,
 12 = 75 and older) income (current household income): (1 = Less than
 $5,000, 2 = $5,000 - $9,999, 3 = $10,000 - $14,999, 4 = $15,000 - $19,999,
 5 = $20,000 - $29,999, 6 = $30,000 - $39,999, 7 = $40,000 - $49,999, 8 =
 $50,000 - $59,999, 9 = $60,000 - $74,999, 10 = $75,000 - $99,999, 11 =
 $100,000 - $149,999, 12 = $150,000 or more) race: (1 = American Indian or
 Alaska Native, 2 = Asian, 3 = Native-Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander, 4 =
 Black, 5 = White, Non-Hispanic, 6 = Hispanic, 7 = Multi-Racial, 8 = Other)
 policy amount (in U.S. dollars) risk rating: directly from
 participant's policy declarations page original risk code: 0 = Select
 Preferred (or equivalent), 1 = Preferred (or equivalent), 2 = Standard
 (non-tobacco), 3 = Preferred Tobacco, 4 = Tobacco, 5 = Substandard
 (non-tobacco), 6 = Substandard (tobacco) smoker: 1 = yes. collapsed risk
 code: For non-smokers, codes 0 and 1 were low risk, code 2 was medium
 risk, and code 5 was high risk. All smokers were coded as high risk.
 rel_age_death: "Compared to other people of your age, how soon do you
 think you are going to die?" 7-point scale anchored by 1 = "Not
 very soon" and 7 = "Very soon" abs_age_death:
 "Realistically, what age do you think you'll be when you die?
 Please enter in numeric format (e.g. 85)" For all the scales listed
 below, entries show the mean score across items. mating effort: 7-point
 scale anchored by 1 = "strongly disagree" and 7 = "strongly
 agree" parenting effort: 7-point scale anchored by 1 = "strongly
 disagree" and 7 = "strongly agree" stmo (Short-term mating
 orientation): 7-point scale anchored by 1 = "strongly disagree"
 and 7 = "strongly agree" hex_con (HEXACO conscientiousness):
 6-point scale anchored by 1 = "very inaccurate" and 6 =
 "very accurate" cfc (Concern for future consequences): 5-point
 scale anchored by 1 = "extremely uncharacteristic" and 5 =
 "extremely characteristic" grips (General risk propensity
 scale): 5-point scale anchored by 1 = "strongly disagree" and 5
 = "strongly agree" impulse atten (Attention subscale of the
 Abbreviated Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (ABIS)): 4-point scale anchored by
 1 = "rarely/never" and 4 = almost always/always" impulse
 motor (Motor subscale of the Abbreviated Barratt Impulsiveness Scale
 (ABIS)): 4-point scale anchored by 1 = "rarely/never" and 4 =
 almost always/always" impulse nonplan (Non-planning subscale of the
 Abbreviated Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (ABIS)): 4-point scale anchored by
 1 = "rarely/never" and 4 = almost always/always"
 impulse_all: mean of the three ABIS subscales aggress (Agression
 questionnaire): 6-point scale anchored by 1 = "Extremely
 uncharacteristic of me" and 6 = "Extremely characteristic of
 me" csi_neighbor: (Neighborhood disorder subscale of the City Stress
 Inventory (CSI)): 4-point scale anchored by 1 = "never/none" and
 4 = "often/most" csi_violence: (Exposure to violence subscale of
 the City Stress Inventory (CSI)): 4-point scale anchored by 1 =
 "never/none" and 4 = "often/most" csi_all: mean of the
 two CSI subscales rfq (Risky families questionnaire): 5-point scale
 anchored by 1 = "not at all" and 5 = "very often"
 ksf_parents (Relationships with parents subscale of the K-SF-42): 4-point
 scale anchored by 1 = "not at all" and 4 = "a lot" The
 R Code used in analyses is in the file: Lukaszewski-Manson-R-code
 **Sharing/access Information** This is the only publicly available source
 of these data and R code. ## Human subjects data We have received explicit
 consent from our participants to publish the de-identified data in the
 public domain. We have de-identified the data by removing all individually
 identifying information (IP addresses, and for the six in-person
 participants in Study 2, their names) from data files before uploading
 them.