# Experimental Study on the Risk Preference Characteristics of Members in Supply Chain Emergencies
## 2 Experimental Design and Methods  
### Experimental Hypothesis  
[PERSON] [10] used a five-point scale to test 40 questions on a scale from 5 (very likely) to 1 (very unlikely) and calculated the mean and standard deviation of the test scores. Those higher scores more than one standard deviation above the mean show risk-seeking behavior, those lower scores more than one standard deviation below the mean show risk-averse behavior, and the rest show risk-neutral behavior. Some research showed that the individual risk attitude can be measured and the general trend of risk neutrality can be presented [24]. The gambling behavior and forest fire experiment were analyzed by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [25; 26], respectively. By measuring the risk attitude coefficients \(\alpha\) and \(\sigma\), the characteristics of the probability weighting and risk seeking of the subjects were analyzed. Under the condition of a conventional risk and emergency in a supply chain, the risk preference of a decision maker shows the difference in the emergency decision-making scheme. Therefore, it was assumed that the risk preference of the subjects can be measured in the experiment.  
**Hypothesis 1 (H1).**_The risk preferences of supply chain members can be measured._  
According to the scale test, [PERSON] [10] found that the risk preferences of subjects in the five related fields of finance, health and safety, entertainment, ethics, and social decision-making were inconsistent. [PERSON] [13] conducted a questionnaire to analyze the risk preferences of subjects in different fields (gambling, investment, loan to buy a house, income, and insurance). The risk preferences were also inconsistent according to the analysis of [PERSON]'s questionnaire. Therefore, it was assumed that the risk preferences of the subjects in the conventional risk field of supply chain are inconsistent with that of the emergencies, and are also inconsistent with the natural disasters, production accidents, economic fields, and abnormal accidents of supply chain emergencies.  
**Hypothesis 2 (H2).**_(1) The risk preferences of the nine supply chain conventional fields are not consistent with those of emergencies. (2) The members' risk preferences are inconsistent in natural disaster, production accident, economic field, and abnormal accident supply chain emergencies._  
From three experiments with no time pressure and high and low time pressure, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [27] verified that time pressure could affect a decision-maker's behavior. [PERSON] [16] and [PERSON] et al. [24] took students as subjects and found that risk preference and decision-making behavior were affected under time pressure. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [21] investigated the time pressure and bidding behavior of participants using a field auction. [PERSON] [23] and [PERSON] et al. [19] analyzed the relationship between subjects' risk preferences and risk decision-making with lottery tasks. Some scholars also studied the impact of time pressure on risk preference using the unpacking task of risk decision-making [28; 29; 30]. At present, there have been many studies about the impact of time pressure on decision-making, and most of them verified that time pressure reduced the quality of decision-making. Therefore, it is important to study whether the risk preference of a member changes with time pressure being added, and if so, what the evolution state is.  
**Hypothesis 3 (H3).**_Time pressure will weaken the risk preference of decision makers in supply chain emergencies._