Organizations are squeezing their overhead budgets (where security initiatives fall) and are focusing more on revenue generation given current economic climates. Thus in both governmental sectors and in commercial settings, there are reasons to believe that strategic security initiatives are being sacrificed, and those that survive must be compelling to decisionmakers who may be biased toward one choice or another. To assist decisionmakers with difficult choices, it is critical to understand how biases affect long-range security initiative decisions. Although biases and behavioral decision theory (BDT) have been extensively researched in various contexts, this study contributes to the body of security literature by filling a gap in relation to how biases defined in BDT influence security initiatives over the long-run. This study conducted a longitudinal empirical investigation using a BDT model into how biases may affect long-range security initiative decisionmaking, examining an important moderated interaction among the factors. Risk tolerance was shown to interact with overconfidence, anchoring adjustment, and utility such that these biases were amplified. This article represents a phase-3 in a four-phased study. (Published Abstract)