The social psychology of seismic hazard adjustment: re-evaluating the international literature

Abstract

Abstract. The majority of people at risk from earthquakes do little or nothing to reduce their vulnerability. Over the past 40 years social scientists have tried to predict and explain levels of seismic hazard adjustment using models from behavioural sciences such as psychology. The present paper is the first to synthesise the major findings from the international literature on psychological correlates and causes of seismic adjustment at the level of the individual and the household. It starts by reviewing research on seismic risk perception. Next, it looks at norms and normative beliefs, focusing particularly on issues of earthquake protection responsibility and trust between risk stakeholders. It then considers research on attitudes towards seismic adjustment attributes, specifically beliefs about efficacy, control and fate. It concludes that an updated model of seismic adjustment must give the issues of norms, trust, power and identity a more prominent role. These have been only sparsely represented in the social psychological literature to date.

Embodied uncertainty: living with complexity and natural hazards

“…Under conditions of infrequent and unpredictable hazard events there is a large amount of uncertainty and ambiguity in deciding whether and how to respond to risk (Solberg, Rossetto, and Joffe 2010). Social identities contribute to how we see ourselves and derive group membership.…”

“…The categorisation of self and of others into common social identities is a strategy for enhancing cohesion with a given community (Fiske 2004;Joffe and Staerkle 2007). Social identities include social norms, which are rules for behaviour that are constructed within a group or culture, as people endorse or passively impose normative behaviours on their members (Solberg, Rossetto, and Joffe 2010). Social norms influence attitudes and behaviour (Terry, Hogg, and White 1999;White et al 2009).…”

Earthquake awareness and perception of risk among the residents of Istanbul

“…Attitudes such as belief in the effectiveness of measures, which motivate adjustment behaviours and do not constitute major obstacles to disaster risk reduction efforts, were considered as action-stimulating behaviour. Attitudes such as fatalism, which reduce or obviate the motivation to take warnings seriously and the intention to engage in adjustment behaviours (Solberg et al, 2010), were considered as not stimulating behaviour. (Respondent showed at least 7 actionstimulating attitudes = 1, respondent showed fewer than 7 action-stimulating attitudes = 0.)…”

“…On the other hand, the quantitative study indicated earthquake knowledge variables among the important factors predicting the likelihood of preparing for an earthquake. Even though risk perception is an indirect factor in the process of taking action, many studies point to its importance (Solberg et al 2010). This paper, therefore, examines the factors associated with enhanced perception of and awareness about the risk in Istanbul, where an earthquake with a magnitude greater than 7 on the Richter scale is expected at any time within 30 years with a 62% (±15%) probability (Parsons et al 2000).…”

Tropical cyclone perceptions, impacts and adaptation in the Southwest Pacific: an urban perspective from Fiji, Vanuatu and Tonga

“…Similarly, a study on seismic risk perception in Europe (Plapp and Werner, 2006) identified a number of respondents that believed God controlled the onset of seismic events to inflict punishment. As discussed by Solberg et al (2010), a significant disconnect between reality (scientific knowledge) and lay interpretations of the earth's processes exists.…”