Your second paragraph seems to be agreeing with the first of my parenthetical points, but it sounds as if it's intended to be a point of disagreement.

It was disagreeing with your second point, "much too rare for rational consideration of their risk to yield the reported difference in evaluation". If the person is risk-averse, then it's not too rare for rational consideration of the risk to yield the difference. (Don't assume that risk aversion is inherently iirational. It's not.)