Impact of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident on Belief in Rumors: The Role of Risk Perception and Communication

Abstract

Rumors about nuclear power energy and its risks in terms of technology are common. However, these rumors are sometimes exaggerated and not true. Our research question is what factors and variables have influence the rumors related to the Fukushima nuclear accident. We analyzed data collected through social survey (n = 1572). To measure the dependent variable, we asked respondents whether rumors related to the Fukushima nuclear accident were true or false, and the degree to which they trusted such rumors. We measured three factors in determining belief in rumors: psychometric paradigm, communication, and risk perception. We then analyzed the direct impact of these three factors on belief in rumors and the indirect moderating effect of perceived risk of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the relationship between psychometric factors and belief in rumors. Results show that in the communication factors, source credibility decreases belief in rumors whereas usefulness of information and receiver's ability increase it. All the psychometric variables have significant impacts on belief in rumors. Perceived benefit, trust, and knowledge decrease belief in rumors, and perceived risk and stigma increase it. Finally, the perceived risk of Fukushima accident plays a role of moderators between psychometric paradigm and belief in rumors.

Mediating and Moderating Roles of Trust in Government in Effective Risk Rumor Management: A Test Case of Radiation‐Contaminated Seafood in South Korea

“…For months and years afterward, rumors about these radiation hazards spread among the South Korean public. Several of these falsely claimed that Japan was exporting contaminated seafood, and that the Japanese and South Korean governments were colluding to cover up offloading it on South Korean consumers (Kim & Kim, ).…”

Effective strategies for responding to rumors about risks: The case of radiation-contaminated food in South Korea

“…For months and years afterward, several rumors about these radiation hazards spread among the South Korean public. Many rumors were about whether Japan was exporting contaminated seafood, and whether the Japanese and South Korean governments were colluding to cover up foisting that food onto unwitting South Korean consumers (Kim & Kim, 2017). In the months immediately after the nuclear accident, sales of Japanese fishery products in South Korea plummeted (Jeong, 2011).…”

“…In this case, the types of unverified claims that were spread illustrate the tendency for risk-related rumors to be negative, inaccurate, conspiracy-laden, and likely to frighten people. In 2013, two years after the Fukushima disaster, persistent rumors about contaminated food imports were so widespread and inaccurate that the South Korean Prime Minister publicly threatened legal punishments for people caught spreading them (Kim & Kim, 2017). Most academic studies of risk-related rumors have focused on those that arise during corporate public relations crises.…”

“…Several studies of crisis-related rumors in South Korea have focused on how rumor types or rumor characteristics relate to the following variables: rumor-related beliefs about risks, intention to disseminate risk rumors, risk-related purchasing behaviors, and perceptions of the reputations of organizations deemed responsible for causing risks (e.g., Kim, Yoo, & Kahn, 2015;Lee & Kim, 2016;Zhang & Cho, 2017). Among the examined factors that affected rumor beliefs and dissemination intention are channel characteristics (e.g., trust in Internet information: Kim & Kim, 2017;Ryu & Kim, 2016), audience characteristics (involvement, efficacy, emotional reaction: Ahn & Lee, 2011), and information processing (Kwon & Cho, 2017).…”

Searching for the Next New Energy in Energy Transition: Comparing the Impacts of Economic Incentives on Local Acceptance of Fossil Fuels, Renewable, and Nuclear Energies

“…Second, because the conditional sentence has two stimuli, namely, economic benefits and the installation of a power plant in the local area, it is difficult to clearly distinguish which stimulus influences acceptability. Third, although there were various cultural value, communication, structure, and other perception variables in the acceptance of policy or technology [67][68][69][70][71][72][73], we did not consider them.…”