DECISIONS, EMERGENCY AND VALUE. THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN WHAT PEOPLE DO AND WHAT PEOPLE THINK THEY WILL DO IN AN EMERGENCY

Individuals, scientists and organizations have questioned on more than one occasion the degree of rationality underlying human being decisions. It has been observed that, in situations of uncertainty, the aversion to loss imprints an important fragility on the way of deciding. This leads to the question of what will happen when a choice is made in an emergency - will the choice made outside the emergency context coincide with that made in an emergency? This research addresses both situations and analyses differences and similarities between how a decision is made in an emergency and how it is thought to be made in an emergency. In an attempt to answer these questions, a double experiment has been carried out, a staged quasi-analytical simulation (hot state) and a virtual simulation (cold state), the results of which corroborate the existence of discrepancies between the decisions people take and those people think they would take. The results provide new perspectives on the meaning of value, the endowment effect, and the importance that society attaches to the everyday objects.