A Cognitive‐Affective Scale for Hurricane Risk Perception

Abstract

The aim of this study was to develop a reliable and valid measure of hurricane risk perception. The utility of such a measure lies in the need to understand how people make decisions when facing an evacuation order. This study included participants located within a 15-mile buffer of the Gulf and southeast Atlantic U.S. coasts. The study was executed as a three-wave panel with mail surveys in 2010-2012 (T baseline N = 629, 56%; T retention N = 427, 75%; T retention N = 350, 89%). An inventory based on the psychometric model was developed to discriminate cognitive and affective perceptions of hurricane risk, and included open-ended responses to solicit additional concepts in the T survey. Analysis of the T data modified the inventory and this revised item set was fielded at T and then replicated at T . The resulting scales were assessed for validity against existing measures for perception of hurricane risk, dispositional optimism, and locus of control. A measure of evacuation expectation was also examined as a dependent variable, which was significantly predicted by the new measures. The resulting scale was found to be reliable, stable, and largely valid against the comparison measures. Despite limitations involving sample size, bias, and the strength of some reliabilities, it was concluded that the measure has potential to inform approaches to hurricane preparedness efforts and advance planning for evacuation messages, and that the measure has good promise to generalize to other contexts in natural hazards as well as other domains of risk.

Sizing Up a Superstorm: Exploring the Role of Recalled Experience and Attribution of Responsibility in Judgments of Future Hurricane Risk

“…Third, as would be expected, a relatively small proportion (7.4%) of our sample reported evacuating during Hurricane Sandy; a larger proportion would have allowed us more confidence in the relationship between past evacuation, attribution of responsibility, and risk judgment. Finally, although the model only accounted for a moderate proportion of variance in risk judgment (15%), it was on a par with past research that also examined hurricane‐related risk perceptions . Similar to these studies, despite the low R 2 in the endogenous variables, the statistically significant predicting variables identified in this research still provide meaningful information regarding the sociopsychological factors that constitute risk perception in this research context.…”

Influence of Risk Perception on Attitudes and Norms Regarding Electronic Cigarettes

“…This inventory of measurement items was based squarely on the psychometric model as advanced and refined by Slovic and colleagues . As noted, a very similar application of this approach was previously used in the context of natural hazards, specifically for perception of risk associated with hurricanes . The performance of the inventory in this different context was quite similar and suggests some basis to recommend the approach to other areas of risk.…”

“…The use of a cognitive–affective, or dual process, multi‐item approach to risk perception in the domain of health may provide a more consistent, nuanced, and theoretically sound approach. This adaptation of dual‐process risk perception has been demonstrated recently in the domain of natural hazards, and will be used here as well …”

The impact of flood action groups on the uptake of flood management measures

“…Second, a more comprehensive measure of risk perception would have been feasible and delivered different results. This includes, amongst others, dread and unknown risk (Fischhoff et al 1978), and combining these with well known disaster risks (Trumbo et al 2016) or people's expectations of the personal impacts caused by a disaster (Huang et al 2012, Mileti and Peek 2000, Mileti and Sorensen 1987. Third, the changes in uptake of certain measures may also partly be due to external reasons not captured in the study, such as easier access to flood warnings or the challenge of obtaining flood insurance for certain high risk properties.…”