BeSeCu-S – a self-report instrument for emergency survivors

Knuth, Daniela; Kehl, Doris; Galea, Edwin R.; Hulse, Lynn; Sans, Jordi; Vallès, Lola; Roiha, Malin; Seidler, Frank; Diebe, Eberhard; Kecklund, Lena; Petterson, Sara; Wolanin, Jerzy; Beltowski, Grzegorz; Preiss, Marek; Sotolárová, Marie; Holubová, Markéta; Sofuoğlu, Turhan; Sofuoğlu, Zeynep; Pietrantoni, Luca; Saccinto, Elisa; Schmidt, Silke

doi:10.1080/13669877.2013.815649

Cited by 9 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All participants gave their informed consent and met the following inclusion criteria: (1) at least 18 years of age; (2) the emergency services attended the incident; and (3) the emergency did not happen any earlier than 1999. Participants' data were obtained through a self-report instrument (BeSeCu-S), which was the result of a cross-national development process (38) including literature review, expert consultations, focus groups with survivors and first responders, and a pretest. Participants who did not provide data for all of the risk perception items (n = 31) or their country of residence (n = 3) were excluded from this study.…”

Section: Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Perception, Experience, and Objective Risk: A Cross‐National Study with European Emergency Survivors

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a 24 month embargo from 24 December 2013 to 24 December 2015 in accordance with the journal's author permissions. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.The accepted version may be used on the following terms, which may be amended from time to time: Use by non-commercial users For non-commercial and non-promotional research and private study purposes individual users may view, print, download and copy self-archived articles, as well as text-and data-mine the content subject to the following conditions: ■The authors' moral rights are not compromised. These rights include the right of "paternity" (also known as "attribution" -the right for the author to be identified as such) and "integrity" (the right for the author not to have the work altered in such a way that the author's reputation or integrity may be impugned). All re-use must be fully attributed. ■Where content in the article is identified as belonging to a third party, it is the obligation of the user to ensure that any reuse complies with the copyright policies of the owner of that content. ■Self-archived content may not be re-published verbatim in whole or in part, whether or not for commercial purposes, in print or online. This restriction does not apply to use of quotations with appropriate citation, or text and data mining provided that the mining output is restricted to short excerpts of text and data and excludes images (unless further consent is obtained from Wiley). 2 AbstractUnderstanding public risk perceptions and their underlying processes is important in order to learn more about the way people interpret and respond to hazardous emergency events. Direct experience with an involuntary hazard has been found to heighten the perceived risk of experiencing the same hazard and its consequences in the future but it remains unclear if cross-over effects are possible (i.e. experience with one hazard influencing perceived risk for other hazards also). Furthermore, the impact of objective risk and country of residence on perceived risk is not well understood. As part of the BeSeCu (Behaviour, Security and Culture) project a sample of 1045 survivors of emergencies from seven European countries (i.e. Germany, Czech Republic, Poland, Sweden, Spain, Turkey and Italy) was drawn. Results revealed heightened perceived risk for emergency events (i.e. domestic and public fires, earthquakes, floods and terrorist attacks) when the event had been experienced previously plus some evidence of cross-over effects, although these effects were not so strong. The largest country differences in perceived risk were observed for earthquakes, but this effect was significantly reduced by taking into account the objective earthquake risk. For fires, floods, terrorist attacks and traffic accidents, only small country differences in perceived risk were found. Further studies including a larger number of countries are welcomed.

show abstract

Section: Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Perception, Experience, and Objective Risk: A Cross‐National Study with European Emergency Survivors

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such events have affected how people perceive risks related to terrorist attacks. According to Knuth et al (2013), direct exposure to risk heightens individuals' risk perceptions.…”

Section: Cognitive Map Of Risk Perception In Jordanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Perception in a Developing Country: The Case of Jordan

Alrawad¹,

Khattab²

2014

IBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Recognizing the importance of risk perception and the poor understanding of the phenomenon in developing countries, this study characterizes risk perception in Jordan. Design:A mixed quantitative and qualitative survey approach was adopted. Semi-structured interviews were used to identify risks relevant to Jordanian society, then perceptions of these were examined using a questionnaire. Sampling was stratified by province and convenience sampling was adopted within each stratum. The response rate of 53.6 percent was adequate for accurate and useful results representative of the target population. The questionnaire data were analyzed using parametric statistics including principal component analysis and mean analysis.Findings: A cognitive map shows that Jordanians perceived warfare and terrorist attack as the most dreaded, catastrophic and uncontrollable risks to society. Refugee influx was also perceived as a high risk on the dreaded dimension. Although Jordan generates no nuclear electricity, nuclear power was also loaded high on the dreaded factor, confirming that risk perception can be affected by negative international events. Research Limitations/Implications:A proper interpretation of the cognitive map requires an appreciation of the plasticity of risk, as perceptions are changed by scientific knowledge, media coverage and globalization of risk issues. Future research should examine these changes and determine other possible variables influencing risk ratings at different times. While stratified sampling helped the representativeness of the sample, convenience sampling was applied within each stratum. Future research might use probability sampling instead. This study gives risk analysts and policymakers a basis for understanding and anticipating public responses to risks and improving the communication of risk information among laypeople and decision-makers.Originality: This study is one of few to develop a cognitive map and investigate factors influencing risk perception in Jordan, in the volatile Middle East. Rather than surveying mainly students, it used a representative sample from Jordan's 12 provinces.

show abstract