The Significance of Socioeconomic and Ethnic Diversity for the Risk Communication Process

Risk communication is being characterized as one way of facilitating more effective, democratic and participatory risk management strategies. An emphasis on formal communication approaches as a means to improve decisions and decrease conflict will highlight the challenge of managing hazards within a culturally heterogeneous society. Communication and participatory strategies will be considered successful only if diverse communities can be engaged as partners in the policy process. Because responses to risks are embedded and evolve within broader social environments, achieving the promise of risk communication across a diverse society may not be possible absent an understanding of how sociocultural variables and past experiences shape the exchange of ideas or information in any particular situation. This paper considers the implications of ethnic and socioeconomic variability for the risk communication process, summarizing theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence on the link between sociocultural features and risk responses. Specifically, the factors that define the context of communication may influence: the initial framing of a risk issue, particularly, the adoption of an environmental justice vs. scientific/economic perspective; the perceived importance of various aspects of the decision problem; and prior beliefs about environmental hazards and agencies involved in risk management. Two examples of situations requiring communications about risk are presented and illustrate how these principles could operate in minority or lower-income communities. A significant challenge for health and regulatory officials will be to engage in an interactive process of information and opinion exchanges that is reasonable and effective within vastly different socioeconomic and cultural contexts.     

Risk Perception and the Value of Safety

This paper examines the relationship between perceived risk and willingness-to-pay (WTP) for increased safety from technological hazards in both conceptual and empirical terms. A conceptual model is developed in which a given household's WTP for risk reductions is a function of traditional socioeconomic variables (i.e., income and base level of risk) and perceived characteristics of the hazards (i.e., dread, knowledge, and exposure). Data to estimate the model are obtained through a combined contingent valuation and risk perception survey that considers 10 technological hazards, five of which are well-defined (e.g., death rates are known and the risks are relatively common) and five are less well-defined. Econometric results, using TOBIT estimation procedures, support the importance of both types of variables in explaining WTP across all 10 hazards. When the risks are split into two groups, the results show that WTP for well-defined hazards is most influenced by perceived personal exposure, while WTP for less well-defined risks is most influenced by levels of dread and severity.     

The Dynamics of Risk Perception: How Does Perceived Risk Respond to Risk Events?

This paper examines the relationship between perceived risk and experience. This research addresses the processes by which people learn about risk and choose among real life prospects with associated uncertainties, risks and benefits. By comparing the impact of acute risk events with that of chronic risk events on public perception of risk during and after the events, this research focuses on the learning processes that characterize what kinds of risk events alter the perception of risk. Comparing materialized hazards at existing facilities with the risks associated with potential facilities, this research addresses risk choices among real life prospects. This study uses a classic pre-post quasi-experimental design. Surveys conducted in the Spring of 1992 on perceived and acceptable risk in Odessa and La Porte, Texas were conducted prior to risk events. Respondents from that survey were re-interviewed in the Spring of 1993 after the risk events to form a panel design. This paper analyzes the affect of risk events on perceived risk and the implications of these experiences for public policy concerning technological risk. The empirical results suggest that the social processes that construct and maintain risk in the public eye are at least as important as, if not more important than, the physical and psychological dimensions of risk.     

A Psychometric Study of Information Technology Risks in the Workplace

As organizations become increasingly reliant on information technology (IT) they are exposed to a growing number of risks. Surprisingly, however, very few studies to date have investigated the psychometric representation of IT risks, and none have been undertaken in the workplace. Accordingly, the present study was designed to map the judgments of a representative group of workplace IT users. Fifty-seven participants evaluated 18 IT risk scenarios by means of 13 bipolar attribute-rating scales. Profile proximities derived from the raw data were submitted to a weighted multidimensional scaling analysis. The results indicated that a six-dimensional solution was required on both statistical and conceptual grounds to represent adequately the participants' judgments. The dimensions reflected the extent to which the various risk scenarios were perceived as: (1) serious or minor in nature; (2) having a high or low probability of occurrence; (3) causing a high or low degree of stress; (4) deliberate or accidental; (5) having an impact on the organization or on individuals; and (6) the product of human or technological causes. The data were also submitted to a series of hierarchical cluster analyses, using a variety of agglomeration techniques. This second approach revealed a robust structure in which the risk scenarios were grouped into two broad categories, based on whether the events depicted would be likely to have a major or minor impact. The major impact category broke down further, into two subcategories, based on whether the scenarios were seen to arise from deliberate causes or through negligence. In conclusion, we consider the implications of our findings for future research, the refinement of IT risk assessment frameworks and tools, and the training of risk management professionals.     

The Role of Emotions in Risk Communication

We present two experiments investigating the role of emotions concerning technological and natural hazards. In the first experiment, technological hazards aroused stronger emotions, and were considered to be riskier than natural hazards. No differences were found between the texts versus audio presentations. However, the presence of pictures aroused stronger emotions and increased the perceived risk. Emotions play a mediating role between hazard types and perceived risk, as well as between pictures and perceived risk. The second experiment adopted real‐world materials from webpages and TV. Emotions again play a mediating role between pictorial information and risk perception. Moreover, specific emotions were found to be associated with different types of action tendencies. For example, loss‐based emotions (e.g., fear, regret) tend to lead to prevention strategies, whereas ethical emotions (e.g., anger) lead to aggressive behavior. We also find that loss‐based emotions in the technical hazard scenario trigger more coping strategies (from prevention to retaliation) than in the natural hazard scenario.     

The Role of the Affect and Availability Heuristics in Risk Communication

Results of past research suggest that affect plays an important role in risk perception. Because affect may also increase the availability of risks, affect and availability are closely related concepts. Three studies tested the hypothesis that evoking negative affect (fear), either through past experience or through experimental manipulation, results in greater perceived risk. The present research focused on perception of flooding risk. Study 1 and Study 2 showed that participants who received risk information concerning a longer time period (e.g., 30 years) perceived more danger compared with participants who received risk information for one year. Study 2 showed that the interpretation of risk information was influenced by participants' own experiences with flooding. In Study 3, affect was experimentally manipulated. After looking at photographs depicting houses in a flooded region, participants perceived greater risk compared with participants in a control group. Taken together, the results of these three studies suggest that affect is important for successful risk communication. Results of the present research are in line with the affect heuristic proposed by Slovic and colleagues.     

Hot Potato: Expert-Consumer Differences in the Perception of a Second-Generation Novel Food

Novel foods have been the object of intense public debate in recent years. Despite widespread efforts to communicate the outcomes of risk assessments to consumers, public confidence in risk management has been low. Social scientists have identified various reasons for this, including a disagreement between technical experts and consumers over the nature of the hazards on which risk assessments should focus. The aim of this study was to identify and compare the ways in which experts and consumers understand the benefits and risks associated with a genetically modified example crop. Two qualitative studies were conducted. In Study 1, mental models were elicited from 24 experts by means of a three-wave Delphi procedure. In Study 2, mental models were elicited from 25 consumers by means of in-depth interviews. As expected, the expert mental models were focused on the types of hazards that can realistically be addressed under current regulatory frameworks, whereas the consumers were often more concerned about issues outside the scope of current legislation. Moreover, the experts tended to define risk and benefit in terms of detailed chains of cause-effect relationships between variables for which clear definitions and measurement rules exist. The concepts the consumers used when reasoning about biological processes were very abstract, suggesting that the participants had, at most, a holistic understanding. In line with this, issues of uncertainty played a prominent role for the consumers.     

Patterns of Conflict About Risky Technologies

This paper examines taxonomies for classifying risks and conflicts about risky technologies. First, we describe six levels of conflict that represent various " shades of gray" between purely factual and purely value laden conflicts in technology disputes. Subsequently, we survey several recent taxonomies of risks and hazards that were at least partly intended to clarify the nature of the public conflicts about technologies and their risks. After pointing out that non-risk features frequently shape technology debates, we develop a taxonomy of the disputes themselves, based on a collection of 162 cases. Our taxonomy of technological controversies is related to the recent risk taxonomies and to the different levels of conflict. It turns out that the different technological disputes create quite different levels of conflict ranging from mainly factual (consumer products, drugs) to extremely value laden (nuclear power, genetic engineering). Depending on the type of controversy and level of conflict we suggest alternative conflict management strategies.     

Developing a Broadly Applicable Measure of Risk Perception

Decades of research identify risk perception as a largely intuitive and affective construct, in contrast to the more deliberative assessments of probability and consequences that form the foundation of risk assessment. However, a review of the literature reveals that many of the risk perception measures employed in survey research with human subjects are either generic in nature, not capturing any particular affective, probabilistic, or consequential dimension of risk; or focused solely on judgments of probability. The goal of this research was to assess a multidimensional measure of risk perception across multiple hazards to identify a measure that will be broadly useful for assessing perceived risk moving forward. Our results support the idea of risk perception being multidimensional, but largely a function of individual affective reactions to the hazard. We also find that our measure of risk perception holds across multiple types of hazards, ranging from those that are behavioral in nature (e.g., health and safety behaviors), to those that are technological (e.g., pollution), or natural (e.g., extreme weather). We suggest that a general, unidimensional measure of risk may accurately capture one's perception of the severity of the consequences, and the discrete emotions that are felt in response to those potential consequences. However, such a measure is not likely to capture the perceived probability of experiencing the outcomes, nor will it be as useful at understanding one's motivation to take mitigation action.     

Measuring feelings about choices and risks: The Berlin Emotional Responses to Risk Instrument (BERRI)

We introduce a brief instrument specifically validated for measuring positive and negative feelings about risks—the Berlin Emotional Responses to Risk Instrument (BERRI). Based on seven studies involving diverse adults from three countries (n = 2120), the BERRI was found to robustly estimate anticipatory affective reactions derived from subjective evaluations of positive (i.e., assured, hopeful, and relieved) and negative emotions (i.e., anxious, afraid, and worried). The brief BERRI outperformed a 14-item assessment, uniquely tracking costs/benefits associated with cancer screening among men and women (Studies 1 and 2). Predictive validity was further documented in paradigmatic risky choice studies wherein options varied over probabilities and severities across six contexts (health, social, financial, technological, ethical, and environmental; Study 3). Studies 4–6, conducted during the Ebola epidemic and COVID-19 pandemic, indicated BERRI responses were sensitive to subtle effects caused by emotion-related framing manipulations presented in different cultures and languages (the United States, Spain, and Poland). Study 7 indicated BERRI responses remained stable for 2 weeks. Although the BERRI can provide an estimate of overall affect, choices were generally better explained by the unique influences of positive and negative affect. Overall, results suggest the novel, brief instrument can be an efficient tool for high-stakes research on decision making and risk communication.     

Methodological Approaches to Assessing Risk Perceptions Associated with Food-Related Hazards

The psychometric approach developed by Slovic and his co-workers has been effectively used to assess risk perceptions associated with different food-related hazards. However, further examination (using questionnaire data and partial correlation techniques) has indicated that technological hazards are highly differentiated from lifestyle hazards, in terms of both hazard control and knowledge about the hazard. Optimistic bias was also seen to vary between hazards. Further research has focused on a particular hazard, genetic engineering. Risk perceptions associated with genetic engineering are underpinned by ethical concern and questions relating to perceived need for the technology, as well as perceptions of risk or harm. However, increasing the specificity of hazard stimuli was found to alter the factor structure of underlying risk perceptions. The utility of preference mapping procedures in determining individual differences in trust in risk regulators is also discussed.     

Implicit Attitudes Toward Nuclear Power and Mobile Phone Base Stations: Support for the Affect Heuristic

The implicit association test (IAT) measures automatic associations. In the present research, the IAT was adapted to measure implicit attitudes toward technological hazards. In Study 1, implicit and explicit attitudes toward nuclear power were examined. Implicit measures (i.e., the IAT) revealed negative attitudes toward nuclear power that were not detected by explicit measures (i.e., a questionnaire). In Study 2, implicit attitudes toward EMF (electro-magnetic field) hazards were examined. Results showed that cell phone base stations and power lines are judged to be similarly risky and, further, that base stations are more closely related to risk concepts than home appliances are. No differences between experts and lay people were observed. Results of the present studies are in line with the affect heuristic proposed by Slovic and colleagues. Affect seems to be an important factor in risk perception.     

Risk Perceptions of Hong Kongese vs. Americans

Hong Kong students rated the risk of 30 hazards and quantified a subset on six risk characteristics; data are compared to a prior study of American students. Hong Kongese rated 10 hazards substantially higher and five hazards substantially lower than Americans, and factor structures indicated differences on five hazards. Possible explanations for these differences are discussed.     

The Unintended Effects of Risk‐Refuting Information on Anxiety

Researchers in the field of risk perception have been asking why people are more worried about risk today than in years past. This article explores one possible answer to this question, associative anxiety. The affect heuristic and the mental network models suggest that anxiety triggered by information regarding a particular risk can spread to other risks of the same category. Research to date, however, has not examined how information refuting the particular risk can also be generalized across other risks. The article presents two experimental studies addressing this issue. Study 1 showed that when participants were presented with information based on a real train collision, they experienced increased anxiety not only about train collisions but also about public transportation in general. In contrast, those who were informed about the train collision case as well as the preventative measures implemented after the accident experienced decreased anxiety about train collisions but not about public transportation more generally. Study 2 measured the changes in participant anxiety about a genetically modified organism (GMO) and compared the influence of information about either the existence or nonexistence of its risk. Similar to Study 1, associative anxiety rippled through the risk category. The results also suggest that the follow‐up information refuting the GMO risk reduced the anxiety toward the hazard drastically, but did not fully alleviate the anxiety toward other hazards in the category. The implications and the limitations of these studies are also discussed.     

How Close Is Close Enough: Public Perceptions of the Risks of Industrial Facilities

Public opinion poll data have consistently shown that the proportion of respondents who are willing to have a nuclear power plant in their own community is smaller than the proportion who agree that more nuclear plants should be built in this country. Respondents' judgments of the minimum safe distance from each of eight hazardous facilities confirmed that this finding results from perceived risk gradients that differ by facility (e.g., nuclear vs. natural gas power plants) and social group (e.g., chemical engineers vs. environmentalists) but are relatively stable over time. Ratings of the facilities on thirteen perceived risk dimensions were used to determine whether any of the dimensions could explain the distance data. Because the rank order of the facilities with respect to acceptable distance was very similar to the rank order on a number of the perceived risk dimensions, it is difficult to determine which of the latter is the critical determinant of acceptable distance if, indeed, there is only one. There were, however, a number of reversals of rank order that indicate that the respondents had a differentiated view of technological risk. Finally, data from this and other studies were interpreted as suggesting that perceived lack of any other form of personal control over risk exposure may be an important factor in stimulating public opposition to the siting of hazardous facilities.     

Perception and Acceptance of Technological and Environmental Risks: Why Are Poor Countries Less Concerned?

The research has been aimed at answering two questions: (1) What factors impact perception and acceptance of technological and environmental hazards? (2) Why are rich societies involved more in protecting their environment and health than poor societies? Data has been collected from representative samples of two countries—Poland and Sweden. The results indicate that (1) contrary to earlier findings, the inverse relations between perceived benefits and dangers of hazards has not been observed, (2) acceptance of a risk has been mostly influenced by perceived benefits, (3) rejection of a risk has been mostly influenced by its perceived harmful consequences. Concerning the second question, it has been found that: (1) perceived hazard's danger and benefit is not the only factor that impacts its acceptance, and (2) a broader economic context can impact acceptance (tolerance) of hazards. It has been found that being aware of high dangers and not very high benefits of hazardous activities, Poles still have accepted them. Thus, Poles seem to follow an old proverb: “When one does not have what one likes, one has to like what one has.”     

Do People Believe Combined Hazards Can Present Synergistic Risks?

The risk attributable to some hazard combinations can be greater than the sum of the risk attributable to each constituent hazard. Such "synergistic risks" occur in several domains, can vary in magnitude, and often have harmful, even life-threatening, outcomes. Yet, the extent to which people believe that combined hazards can present synergistic risks is unclear. We present the results of two experimental studies aimed at addressing this issue. In both studies, participants examined synergistic and additive risk scenarios, and judged whether these were possible. The results indicate that the proportion of people who believe that synergistic risks can occur declines linearly as the magnitude of the synergistic risk increases. We also find that people believe, despite scientific evidence to the contrary, that certain hazard combinations are more likely to present additive or weakly synergistic risks than synergistic risks of higher magnitudes. Furthermore, our findings did not vary as a simple function of hazard domain (health vs. social), but varied according to the characteristics of the specific hazards considered (specified vs. unspecified drug combinations). These results suggest that many people's beliefs concerning the risk attributable to combined hazards could lead them to underestimate the threat posed by combinations that present synergistic risks, particularly for hazard combinations that present higher synergistic risk magnitudes. These findings highlight a need to develop risk communications that can effectively increase awareness of synergistic risks.     

Assessing the Effects of Information About Global Population Growth on Risk Perceptions and Support for Mitigation and Prevention Strategies

The human population is forecast to increase by 3–4 billion people during this century and many scientists have expressed concerns that this could increase the likelihood of certain adverse events (e.g., climate change and resource shortages). Recent research shows that these concerns are mirrored in public risk perceptions and that these perceptions correlate with a willingness to adopt mitigation behaviors (e.g., reduce resource consumption) and preventative actions (e.g., support actions to limit growth). However, little research has assessed the factors that influence risk perceptions of global population growth (GPG). To contribute to this important goal, this article presents three studies that examined how risk perceptions of GPG might be influenced by textual‐visual representations (like those in media and Internet articles) of the potential effects of GPG. Study 1 found that a textual narrative that highlighted the potential negative (cf. positive) consequences of GPG led to higher perceived risk and greater willingness to adopt mitigation behaviors, but not to support preventative actions. Notably, the influence of the narratives on perceived risk was largely moderated by the participant's prior knowledge and perceptions of GPG. Contrary to expectations, studies 2 and 3 revealed, respectively, that photographs depicting GPG‐related imagery and graphs depicting GPG rates had no significant effect on the perceived risk of GPG or the willingness to embrace mitigation or preventative actions. However, study 3 found that individuals with higher “graph literacy” perceived GPG as a higher risk and were more willing to adopt mitigation behaviors and support preventative actions.     

Aggregate, Disaggregate, and Hybrid Analyses of Ecological Risk Perceptions

Laypeople's perceptions of health and safety risks have been widely studied, but only a few studies have addressed perceptions of ecological hazards. We assembled a list of 39 attributes of ecological hazards from the literatures on comparative risk assessment, ecological health, environmental conservation and management, environmental psychology, and risk perception. In Study 1, 125 laypeople evaluated 83 hazards on subsets of this attribute set. Factor analysis of attribute ratings (averaged over participants) revealed six oblique factors: ecological impacts, human impacts, human benefits, aesthetic impacts, scientific understanding, and controllability. These factors predicted mean judgments of overall riskiness, ecological riskiness, acceptability, and regulatory strictness. In Study 2, 30 laypeople each evaluated 34 hazards on 17 attributes and 3 dependent variables. Aggregate-level factor analysis of these data replicated the appropriate portion of the factor solution and yielded similar regression results. Parallel analyses at the individual-participant level yielded factors that explained less variance in judgments of overall riskiness, ecological riskiness, and acceptability. However, the decrease in explanatory power was much less than is often reported for disaggregate-level analyses of psychometric data. This discrepancy illustrates the importance of distinguishing between the level of analysis (aggregate versus disaggregate) and the focus of analysis (distinctions among hazards versus distinctions among participants). In a hybrid analysis, aggregate-level factor scores predicted individual participants' riskiness judgments reasonably well. Psychometric studies such as these provide a sound empirical basis for selecting attributes of ecological hazards for use in comparative risk assessment.     

Situated Food Safety Risk and the Influence of Social Norms

Previous studies of risk behavior observed weak or inconsistent relationships between risk perception and risk-taking. One aspect that has often been neglected in such studies is the situational context in which risk behavior is embedded: Even though a person may perceive a behavior as risky, the social norms governing the situation may work as a counteracting force, overriding the influence of risk perception. Three food context studies are reported. In Study 1 (N = 200), we assess how norm strength varies across different social situations, relate the variation in norm strength to the social characteristics of the situation, and identify situations with consistently low and high levels of pressure to comply with the social norm. In Study 2 (N = 502), we investigate how willingness to accept 15 different foods that vary in terms of objective risk relates to perceived risk in situations with low and high pressure to comply with a social norm. In Study 3 (N = 1,200), we test how risk-taking is jointly influenced by the perceived risk associated with the products and the social norms governing the situations in which the products are served. The results indicate that the effects of risk perception and social norm are additive, influencing risk-taking simultaneously but as counteracting forces. Social norm had a slightly stronger absolute effect, leading to a net effect of increased risk-taking. The relationships were stable over different social situations and food safety risks and did not disappear when detailed risk information was presented.