Comparative studies of risk perception: a review of twenty years of research

Boholm, Åsa

doi:10.1080/136698798377231

Cited by 349 publications

(202 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

179

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There are, however, individual differences in risk perception that are neglected by using aggregated data (Siegrist et al 2005). In addition, the factors responsible for the observed cross-cultural differences between individuals are not easily discernible (Boholm 1998). Furthermore, the insights from this study cannot be generalized given the type of sampling method we employed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Risk and benefit judgment of excreta as fertilizer in agriculture: An exploratory investigation in Rwanda and Uganda

Ekane

Mertz

Slovic

et al. 2015

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research explores the use of psychometric techniques to improve understanding of psychological mechanisms underlying judgment of excreta as fertilizer in agriculture including other excreta-related activities. Participants consisted of environmental health students, smallholder farmers, and traders in rural and urban Rwanda and Uganda. The finding reveals an inverse relationship between risk and benefit judgments. This relationship holds for the three groups of participants with significant risk and benefit correlations of p < .0001. This finding is consistent with other studies in showing that affect plays a key role in risk perception, judgment, and decision-making. Building on this finding, we conclude that individuals with high risk and low benefit judgment for excreta-related practices would eschew them or emphasize strict standards. Individuals with a high benefit and low risk judgment would engage in excreta management practices regardless of the actual risks involved. This finding is relevant for risk communication and risk management as it indicates that individuals do not rely only on risk management information they receive concerning excreta and related risks but also depend, to an extent, on their feelings about these substances when making judgments and decisions regarding the purpose for using excreta as fertilizer and the level of exposure they can tolerate and manage.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Risk and benefit judgment of excreta as fertilizer in agriculture: An exploratory investigation in Rwanda and Uganda

Ekane

Mertz

Slovic

et al. 2015

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies on societal risk perception by Slovic et al (1985, see also Slovic 1987 have inspired numerous similar studies in a variety of countries (see Boholm 1998 andMullet et al 2004, for recent reviews). In these studies, participants-usually, college students-were instructed to rate the overall severity of hazards such as nuclear weapons, vaccinations, smoking, and herbicides on scales ranging from Not at all risky to Extremely risky.…”

Section: Societal Risk Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Societal Risk Perception in Present Day Russia

Rodionova

Vinsonneau

Rivière

et al. 2009

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study analyzed new information regarding the way in which present day Russians (living in Moscow or Tula) perceive societal risks. The main concerns of Russians in year 2003 were essentially the same ones that were identified in previous studies conducted on Western samples: violence, sex, and addiction-type hazards received the highest risk ratings. Women's mean risk judgments were systematically higher than men's mean judgments, and older participants' mean judgments were higher than younger participants' mean judgments regarding domestic hazards. Technically trained people perceived higher societal risk than people with training in the humanities, but the difference between people with technical training and people trained in the humanities was more accentuated among younger people than among the elderly. Also, men living in Tula perceived themselves as less exposed to risks of violence than women living in Tula and both men and women living in Moscow.

show abstract

“…The difference between attitudes and perceptions is that attitudes are evaluations of reality, whereas perceptions relates to the process of understanding. Perceptions and communication are important elements in current risk literature (Fischhoff et al 1997;Boholm 1998).…”

Section: Research Questionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flood risk perceptions and spatial multi-criteria analysis: an exploratory research for hazard mitigation

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conventional method of risk analysis (with risk as a product of probability and consequences) does not allow for a pluralistic approach that includes the various risk perceptions of stakeholders or lay people within a given social system. This article introduces a methodology that combines the virtues of three different methods: the quantifiable conventional approach to risk; the taxonomic analysis of perceived risk; and the analytical framework of a spatial multi-criteria analysis. This combination of methods is applied to the case study 'Ebro Delta' in Spain as part of the European sixth framework project 'Floodsite'. First, a typology for flood hazards is developed based on individual and/or stakeholders' judgements. Awareness, worry and preparedness are the three characteristics that typify a community to reflect various levels of ignorance, perceived security, perceived control or desired risk reduction. Applying 'worry' as the central characteristic, a trade-off is hypothesized between Worry and the benefits groups in society receive from a risky situation. Second, this trade-off is applied in Spatial Multi-Criteria Analysis (SMCA). MCA is the vehicle that often accompanies participatory processes, where governmental bodies have to decide on issues in which local stakeholders have a say. By using risk perception-scores as weights in a standard MCA procedure a new decision framework for risk assessment is developed. Finally, the case of sea-level rise in the Ebro Delta in Spain serves as an illustration of the applied methodology. Risk perception information has been collected with help of an on-site survey. Risk perception enters the multi-criteria analysis as complementary weights for the criteria risk and benefit. The results of the survey are applied to a set of scenarios representing both sea-level rise and land subsidence for a time span of 50 years. Land use alternatives have been presented to stakeholders in order to provide the regional decision maker with societal preferences 123Nat Hazards (2008) 46:307-322 DOI 10.1007 for handling risk. Even with limited resources a characteristic 'risk profile' could be drawn that enables the decision maker to develop a suitable land use policy.

show abstract

Comparative studies of risk perception: a review of twenty years of research

Cited by 349 publications

References 19 publications

Risk and benefit judgment of excreta as fertilizer in agriculture: An exploratory investigation in Rwanda and Uganda

Risk and benefit judgment of excreta as fertilizer in agriculture: An exploratory investigation in Rwanda and Uganda

Societal Risk Perception in Present Day Russia

Flood risk perceptions and spatial multi-criteria analysis: an exploratory research for hazard mitigation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About