Financial resources and decisions to avoid information about environmental perils

Abstract

Environmental perils pose threats that require mitigation. Mitigation requires knowledge of the threat. Ironically, people may opt to avoid information about an environmental peril, especially if they lack resources to respond and the mitigation burden is high or costly. Three experiments (N = 845) examined how available resources and the resource burden of responding to an environmental peril affect the perceived of burden of taking action, and how perceiving burden, in turn, affects avoidance of information about the threat. Experiments 1a and 1b revealed that lower perceived likelihood of taking action and low income predicted a greater tendency to avoid hurricane risk information among Florida residents. Experiment 2 examined receptivity to information about home radon levels and manipulated the burden required to make repairs ($200 vs. $2,000). Having low income and learning repairs were costly corresponded with greater perceived burden of taking action, which predicted a lower likelihood to repair and greater information avoidance. These findings demonstrate that facing a high mitigation burden and lacking resources can lead to remaining uninformed about risks posed by environmental perils. Remaining uninformed is problematic because it may increase people's vulnerability to damage from these threats. However, these findings also identify a potential pathway for intervention. Reminding people of resources they may be unaware of will likely increase their likelihood of preparation and decrease information avoidance.

A Systematic Review of Radon Risk Perception, Awareness, and Knowledge: Risk Communication Options

“…In the United States, where 21 of the selected studies come from, the radon risk is well known to experts and has been studied since the 1980s, including risk perception and risk communication. However, the legislation is not uniform: 29 states require disclosure of radon levels when selling existing homes and 23 require radon abatement in the construction of new homes, but no state requires homeowners or renters to inquire about radon levels in their homes [49]. Six articles reported studies developed in Kentucky, a US state with high levels of radon, smoking, and lung cancer incidence; residential radon levels are also above the US Environmental Protection Agency's action level [50].…”

“…Within the survey studies, the sample size varied between a maximum of 6653 [77] persons involved and a minimum of 35 [71]. The studies used quantitative [30,[49][50][51][52]54,57,60,[63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71]74,75,[77][78][79][80][81][82], qualitative [56,72,83], and mixed quantitative and qualitative methodologies [62,73,84,85], and some were aimed at evaluating an intervention [52,53] or a risk communication tool [63,86]. The qualitative method can enable researchers to go deeper into understanding the individual and collective factors influencing risk perception and capture subjective and objective aspects of radon risk perception, communication, and willingness to address the problem.…”

Stress of COVID-19, Anxiety, Economic Insecurity, and Mental Health Literacy: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach

“…Socioeconomic disparities resulting from job losses and other systemic barriers can also exacerbate mental health issues (e.g., anxiety, depression, etc) among the general population amid COVID-19 (Haidar et al, 2020 ). As one of the most common insecurities, economic insecurity (EI) refers to the sense of uncertainty and unpredictability generated by individuals related to their economic status (Abeyta et al, 2016 ; Chou et al, 2016 ; Losee et al, 2020 ), including fear of unemployment, feeling that the economic situation may get worse, etc (Kopasker et al, 2018 ). A sense of insecurity surrounding one's work life often stems from socioeconomic and personal characteristics of the individual, but insecurity may also be due to the historical context of the cohort to which one belongs (Wickrama et al, 2018 ).…”

Individuals with higher economic insecurity manifest greater self‐serving bias

“…Economic insecurity refers to a state of uncertainty about one's financial well-being (Chou et al, 2016). People could derive sense of economic insecurity from unemployment status, low income, and poor economic prospect (Abeyta et al, 2017;Chou et al, 2016;Losee et al, 2019;Park et al, 2017). Previous studies have documented that economic insecurity increases the risk of physical pain, psychiatric disorders, and heart diseases (Catalano, 1991;Chou et al, 2016;Li & Mutchler, 2019;Russell et al, 2017;Saraiva et al, 2018).…”

“…Previous studies have documented that economic insecurity increases the risk of physical pain, psychiatric disorders, and heart diseases (Catalano, 1991;Chou et al, 2016;Li & Mutchler, 2019;Russell et al, 2017;Saraiva et al, 2018). Economic insecurity could also impair cognitive functioning (Mani et al, 2013), trigger counterproductive financial planning (Shah et al, 2012), and make people afraid to confront with threats posed by environmental perils (e.g., hurricanes, tornadoes, flooding) (Losee et al, 2019). Moreover, it damages self-esteem (Heine et al, 2006;Vohs et al, 2006), decreases sense of control (Chou et al, 2016), undercuts self-worth and sense of meaning in life (Abeyta et al, 2017;Park et al, 2017).…”