Expert and Layperson Perceptions of Ecosystem Risk

This research examines and compares perceptions held by laypeople and ecologists about risks to ecosystems, particularly risk from global climate change (GCC). A survey elicited perceptions of 31 risk characteristics for 13 GCC and 12 non-GCC risks to ecosystems. Factor analysis was used to examine the structure of layperson and expert risk perceptions. Both experts and laypeople tend to perceive GCC risks to ecosystems as less avoidable and more acceptable than risks from other causes. Compared to laypeople's perceptions, though, experts perceived GCC risks to have slightly lower impacts, be less avoidable, more acceptable, and less understandable than non-GCC risks to ecosystems. These findings may help guide efforts to communicate with laypeople about ecological risks from climate change.     

Perceived Risks from Radiation and Nuclear Testing Near Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan: A Comparison Between Physicians, Scientists, and the Public

Determining the difference in perception of risk between experts, or more educated professionals, and laypeople is important so that a potential hazard can be effectively communicated to the public. Many surveys have been conducted to better understand the difference between expert and public opinions, and often laypeople exhibit higher perceptions of risk to hazards in comparison to experts. This is especially true when health risk is due to radiation, nuclear power, and nuclear waste. This article focuses on one section of a risk perception survey given to two groups of individuals with a more specialized education (scientists and physicians) and laypeople (villagers) in the Semipalatinsk region of Kazakhstan. All of these groups live near the former Soviet nuclear test site. Originally, it was expected that the scientists and physicians would have similar perceptions of radiation risk, while the public perceptions would be higher, but this was not always the case. For example, when perceptions of risk pertain to the health impacts of nuclear testing or the dose-response nature of radiation exposure, the physicians tend to agree with the laypeople, not the scientists. The villagers are always the most risk-averse group, followed by the physicians and then the scientists. These differences are likely due to different frames of reference for each of the populations.     

Social Amplification of Wildfire Risk: The Role of Social Interactions and Information Sources

Wildfire is a persistent and growing threat across much of the western United States. Understanding how people living in fire‐prone areas perceive this threat is essential to the design of effective risk management policies. Drawing on the social amplification of risk framework, we develop a conceptual model of wildfire risk perceptions that incorporates the social processes that likely shape how individuals in fire‐prone areas come to understand this risk, highlighting the role of information sources and social interactions. We classify information sources as expert or nonexpert, and group social interactions according to two dimensions: formal versus informal, and generic versus fire‐specific. Using survey data from two Colorado counties, we empirically examine how information sources and social interactions relate to the perceived probability and perceived consequences of a wildfire. Our results suggest that social amplification processes play a role in shaping how individuals in this area perceive wildfire risk. A key finding is that both “vertical” (i.e., expert information sources and formal social interactions) and “horizontal” (i.e., nonexpert information and informal interactions) interactions are associated with perceived risk of experiencing a wildfire. We also find evidence of perceived “risk interdependency”—that is, homeowners’ perceptions of risk are higher when vegetation on neighboring properties is perceived to be dense. Incorporating social amplification processes into community‐based wildfire education programs and evaluating these programs’ effectiveness constitutes an area for future inquiry.     

Risk Perception in the U.K. Oil and Gas Production Industry: Are Expert Loss‐Prevention Managers' Perceptions Different From Those of Members of the Public?

This article investigates potential differences in risk perception between experts (loss-prevention managers in the U.K. oil and gas production industry) and nonexperts (managers and students). Extant research on expert versus nonexpert perceptions of risk is reviewed, followed by the present study concerning risk perceptions of seven pen-picture scenarios involving the occurrence of hazardous events in the U.K. oil and gas production industry. In contrast to many of the earlier studies of expert versus nonexpert perceptions of risk, the present analysis concludes that experts did not judge the overall riskiness of the portrayed hazardous events as less risky than the nonexperts. Nevertheless, the experts believe more strongly than our nonexperts that the risks portrayed in the scenarios pose little threat to future generations, are more precisely known, and are relatively controllable. Use of multiple regression analysis to help uncover the basis of overall riskiness assessments for expert and lay respondents was inconclusive, however. Finally, little evidence was found that nonexperts were any more heterogeneous in their risk perceptions than experts. It may be that the nature of the risks assessed in the present study may account for the general lack of clear expert versus nonexpert differences in overall perceptions of the riskiness of hazardous events in the North Sea. Earlier findings of strong expert versus nonexpert differences in risk perception assessed hazards of major public concern. It is inferred that using such extreme hazards may have resulted in an exaggerated view of differences in expert versus public (nonexpert) perception of risk.     

Laypeople''s and Experts'' Perception of Nanotechnology Hazards

Public perception of nanotechnology may influence the realization of technological advances. Laypeople's (N=375) and experts' (N=46) perception of 20 different nanotechnology applications and three nonnanotechnology applications were examined. The psychometric paradigm was utilized and applications were described in short scenarios. Results showed that laypeople and experts assessed asbestos as much more risky than nanotechnology applications. Analyses of aggregated data suggested that perceived dreadfulness of applications and trust in governmental agencies are important factors in determining perceived risks. Similar results were observed for experts and laypeople, but the latter perceived greater risks than the former. Analyses of individual data showed that trust, perceived benefits, and general attitudes toward technology influenced the perceived risk of laypeople. In the expert sample, confidence in governmental agencies was an important predictor of risks associated with nanotechnology applications. Results suggest that public concerns about nanotechnology would diminish if measures were taken to enhance laypeople's trust in governmental agencies.     

Dengue Disease Risk Mental Models in the City of Dhaka,Bangladesh: Juxtapositions and Gaps Between the Public and Experts

Worldwide, more than 50 million cases of dengue fever are reported every year in at least 124 countries, and it is estimated that approximately 2.5 billion people are at risk for dengue infection. In Bangladesh, the recurrence of dengue has become a growing public health threat. Notably, knowledge and perceptions of dengue disease risk, particularly among the public, are not well understood. Recognizing the importance of assessing risk perception, we adopted a comparative approach to examine a generic methodology to assess diverse sets of beliefs related to dengue disease risk. Our study mapped existing knowledge structures regarding the risk associated with dengue virus, its vector (Aedes mosquitoes), water container use, and human activities in the city of Dhaka, Bangladesh. “Public mental models” were developed from interviews and focus group discussions with diverse community groups; “expert mental models” were formulated based on open‐ended discussions with experts in the pertinent fields. A comparative assessment of the public's and experts’ knowledge and perception of dengue disease risk has revealed significant gaps in the perception of: (a) disease risk indicators and measurements; (b) disease severity; (c) control of disease spread; and (d) the institutions responsible for intervention. This assessment further identifies misconceptions in public perception regarding: (a) causes of dengue disease; (b) dengue disease symptoms; (c) dengue disease severity; (d) dengue vector ecology; and (e) dengue disease transmission. Based on these results, recommendations are put forward for improving communication of dengue risk and practicing local community engagement and knowledge enhancement in Bangladesh.     

Flood Risk Management: US Army Corps of Engineers and Layperson Perceptions

Recent severe storm experiences in the U.S. Gulf Coast illustrate the importance of an integrated approach to flood preparedness planning that harmonizes stakeholder and agency efforts. Risk management decisions that are informed by and address decision maker and stakeholder risk perceptions and behavior are essential for effective risk management policy. A literature review and two expert models/mental models studies were undertaken to identify areas of importance in the flood risk management process for layperson, non‐USACE‐expert, and two USACE‐expert groups. In characterizing and mapping stakeholder beliefs about risks in the literature onto current risk management practice, recommendations for accommodating and changing stakeholder perceptions of flood risks and their management are identified. Needs of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) flood preparedness and response program are discussed in the context of flood risk mental models.     

Lightning Rods,Earthquakes, and Regional Identities: Towards a Multi‐Scale Framework of Assessing Fracking Risk Perception

Hydraulic fracturing has provided a persistent, polarizing, and highly politicized source of controversy internationally and in numerous national contexts for just under a decade. This research uses hydraulic fracturing (i.e., fracking) operations in New Zealand as a vignette through which to understand the underlying causes of controversy and the appropriateness of attempts to address them. A multi‐method approach using interviews (n = 25), diagrammatic analysis, and newsprint media was applied to evidence two major findings. First, previous attempts to explain fracking controversy based on social constructivist theory lack a multi‐scalar approach to the assessment of factors that influence risk perceptions. It is found that risk perception surrounding fracking in New Zealand reflects intra‐scalar interactions between factors originating at the international, national, regional, and local scale. Second, there is a concerning absence of critique pertaining to the concept of “social license to operate” (SLO), which has been advocated both internationally and nationally as an appropriate form of stakeholder engagement. This article contributes to the SLO outcomes literature by establishing a need to consider multi‐scalar influences on risk perception when explaining diverse SLO outcomes in communities where fracking operations are prospective or already taking place.     

Communicating Conservation Status: How Different Statistical Assessment Criteria Affect Perceptions of Extinction Risk

Although alternative forms of statistical and verbal information are routinely used to convey species’ extinction risk to policymakers and the public, little is known about their effects on audience information processing and risk perceptions. To address this gap in literature, we report on an experiment that was designed to explore how perceptions of extinction risk differ as a function of five different assessment benchmarks (Criteria A–E) used by scientists to classify species within IUCN Red List risk levels (e.g., Critically Endangered, Vulnerable), as well as the role of key individual differences in these effects (e.g., rational and experiential thinking styles, environmental concern). Despite their normative equivalence within the IUCN classification system, results revealed divergent effects of specific assessment criteria: on average, describing extinction risk in terms of proportional population decline over time (Criterion A) and number of remaining individuals (Criterion D) evoked the highest level of perceived risk, whereas the single‐event probability of a species becoming extinct (Criterion E) engendered the least perceived risk. Furthermore, participants scoring high in rationality (analytic thinking) were less prone to exhibit these biases compared to those low in rationality. Our findings suggest that despite their equivalence in the eyes of scientific experts, IUCN criteria are indeed capable of engendering different levels of risk perception among lay audiences, effects that carry direct and important implications for those tasked with communicating about conservation status to diverse publics.     

Context,Cultural Bias,and Health Risk Perception: The “Everyday” Nature of Pesticide Policy Preferences in London,Calgary, and Halifax

Risk perception and the cultural theory of risk have often been contrasted in relation to risk‐related policy making; however, the local context in which risks are experienced, an important component of everyday decision making, remains understudied. What is unclear is the extent to which localized community beliefs and behaviors depend on larger belief systems about risk (i.e., worldviews). This article reports on a study designed to understand the relative importance of health risk perceptions (threat of harm); risk‐related worldviews (cultural biases); and the experiences of local context (situated risk) for predicting risk‐related policy preferences regarding cosmetic pesticides. Responses to a random telephone questionnaire are used to compare residents’ risk perceptions, cultural biases, and pesticide bylaw preferences in Calgary (Alberta), Halifax (Nova Scotia), and London (Ontario), Canada. Logistic regression shows that the most important determinants of pesticide bylaw preference are risk perception, lack of benefit, and pesticide “abstinence.” Though perception of health risk is the best single predictor of differences in bylaw preferences, social factors such as gender and situated risk factors like conflict over chemical pesticides, are also important. Though cultural biases are not important predictors of pesticide bylaw preference, as in other studies, they are significant predictors of health risk perception. Pesticide bylaw preference is therefore more than just a health risk perception or worldview issue; it is also about how health risk becomes situated—contextually—in the experiences of residents’ everyday lives.     

Experiments in Lay Cues to the Relative Validity of Positions Taken by Disputing Groups of Scientists

Risk analysis and hazard management can prompt varied intra‐scientific disputes, some which have or will become public, and thus potentially available for lay judgments of the relative validity of the positions taken. As attentive laypeople may include elites as well as the general public, understanding whether and how cues to credibility of disputing groups of scientists might shape those lay judgments can be important. Relevant literatures from philosophy, social studies of science, risk analysis, and elsewhere have identified potential cues, but not tested their absolute or relative effects. Two experiments with U.S. online panel members tested multiple cues (e.g., credentials, experience, majority opinions, research quality) across topics varying in familiarity subject to actual intra‐science disputes (dark matter, marijuana, sea‐level rise). If cues supported a position, laypeople were more likely to choose it as relatively more valid, with information quality, majority “vote,” experience, and degree source as the strongest, and interest, demographic, and values similarity as the weakest, cues. These results were similar in overall rankings to those from implicit rankings of cue reliability ratings from an earlier U.S. online survey. Proposed moderators were generally nonsignificant, but topic familiarity and subjective topic knowledge tended to reduce cue effects. Further research to confirm and extend these findings can inform both theory about citizen engagement with scientific and risk disputes, and practice in communication about science and risk.     

The Impact of Geographic Proximity on What to Buy,How to Buy,and Where to Buy: Evidence from High‐Tech Durable Goods Market*

Social contagion effects due to geographical proximity refer to the social effects wherein the behavior of an individual varies with the behavior of other individuals who are geographically close. Although the influence of such effects on consumer choices has been established in several contexts, much of the extant studies have focused on its effect on consumers’ decision of whether to buy a new product or adopt a new innovation. There has been no systematic examination of the influence of geographic proximity on other aspects of consumers’ product buying process such as what to buy (i.e., brand choice), how to buy (i.e., the channel), and where to buy (i.e., retailers). Such effects can matter significantly in high‐technology and durable goods markets and therefore, it is critical to understand the scope of these on consumers’ choice of retailers and channel as well. Drawing on literatures from word of mouth effects, ecommerce, and consumers’ perception of risk in their purchase process, we develop a set of hypotheses on the effect of geographic proximity on consumers’ choices of what to buy, how to buy, and where to buy. Leveraging a microlevel dataset of purchases of personal computers, we develop brand‐, retailer‐, and channel‐related measures of proximity effects at the individual consumer level and estimate a joint disaggregate model of the three choices that make up a product purchase process to test these hypotheses. Our results indicate a significant contagion effect on each of the three choices. Furthermore, we find evidence of a greater effect of geographic proximity on inexperienced consumers—those who are new to the product category. Our results thus help develop a holistic understanding of the influence of social contagion effects on consumers’ decision making.     

Does Size Matter? A Study of Risk Perceptions of Global Population Growth

The global human population now exceeds 7 billion and is projected to reach 10 billion around 2060. While population growth has been associated with certain benefits (e.g., economies of scale, technological advancements), theoretical models, probabilistic projections, and empirical evidence also indicate that this growth could increase the likelihood of many adverse events (e.g., climate change, resource shortages) and the impact of these events, as more people are exposed to the outcomes. While concerns about these issues are well‐documented in the academic literature, there is little evidence concerning the public's perceptions of the risks associated with global population growth (GPG) and how these perceptions are likely to influence related decisions. To address these issues, we conducted a U.K.‐based study that examined respondents’ risk perceptions of GPG, their willingness to embrace mitigation/precautionary behaviors, and reasons for variations in these two factors. We found that GPG is perceived as a moderate‐to‐high risk, with concerns about the increased likelihood of resource shortages, ecological damage, and violent conflict being foremost. Respondents believed that the worst effects of GPG would arrive around 2050 and would be experienced by the world's poorest people. Respondents who perceived greater levels of risk from GPG were generally those who indicated a greater willingness to embrace mitigation behaviors (e.g., reduce resource consumption) and preventative actions (e.g., support political action to limit growth). We discuss how our findings might be utilized to better manage the potential challenges associated with GPG and we suggest several directions for further research.     

Public Response to a Near‐Miss Nuclear Accident Scenario Varying in Causal Attributions and Outcome Uncertainty

Many studies have investigated public reactions to nuclear accidents. However, few studies focused on more common events when a serious accident could have happened but did not. This study evaluated public response (emotional, cognitive, and behavioral) over three phases of a near‐miss nuclear accident. Simulating a loss‐of‐coolant accident (LOCA) scenario, we manipulated (1) attribution for the initial cause of the incident (software failure vs. cyber terrorist attack vs. earthquake), (2) attribution for halting the incident (fail‐safe system design vs. an intervention by an individual expert vs. a chance coincidence), and (3) level of uncertainty (certain vs. uncertain) about risk of a future radiation leak after the LOCA is halted. A total of 773 respondents were sampled using a 3 × 3 × 2 between‐subjects design. Results from both MANCOVA and structural equation modeling (SEM) indicate that respondents experienced more negative affect, perceived more risk, and expressed more avoidance behavioral intention when the near‐miss event was initiated by an external attributed source (e.g., earthquake) compared to an internally attributed source (e.g., software failure). Similarly, respondents also indicated greater negative affect, perceived risk, and avoidance behavioral intentions when the future impact of the near‐miss incident on people and the environment remained uncertain. Results from SEM analyses also suggested that negative affect predicted risk perception, and both predicted avoidance behavior. Affect, risk perception, and avoidance behavior demonstrated high stability (i.e., reliability) from one phase to the next.     

Determinants of Seeking and Avoiding Risk‐Related Information in Times of Crisis

This research is designed to provide insight into the psychological (e.g., threat appraisal or coping appraisal) and other determinants (e.g., information quality judgments or demographics) of risk information seeking or avoidance in times of an acute risk, as part of the process of increasing public resilience through adherence to risk mitigating advice. Data were collected via telephone interviews. A specialized agency interviewed 1,000 Dutch citizens, randomly confronted with one of eight fictitious, but realistic, acute risk and emergency situations. Results indicate that information seeking in an acute situation is anticipated by a less elaborate set of predictors (age and risk perception) than information seeking in a nonacute situation (age and risk perception, as well as educational level and social norm). Although risk perception is a predictor for risk information seeking, its predictive value for acute‐risk‐related behavior, as one might have assumed based on theories such as protection motivation theory (PMT) or the extended parallel process model (EPPM), appears to be limited. Implications for risk communication are discussed.     

Why Study Risk Perception?

Studies of risk perception examine the opinions people express when they are asked, in various ways, to characterize and evaluate hazardous activities and technologies. This research aims to aid risk analysis and societal decision making by (i) improving methods for eliciting opinions about risk, (ii) providing a basis for understanding and anticipating public responses to hazards, and (iii) improving the communication of risk information among laypeople, technical experts, and policy makers.     

Perception of Risk and the Attribution of Responsibility for Accidents

Accidents, one often hears, “happen”; we accept, and even expect, that they will be part of daily life. But in situations in which injury or death result, judgments of responsibility become critical. How might our perceptions of risk influence the ways in which we allocate responsibility for an accident? Drawing from attribution and risk perception theory, this study investigates how perceived controllability and desirability of risk, in addition to perceived danger and recreational risk‐taking, relate to attributions of responsibility for the cause of unintentional injury in a unique setting: U.S. national parks. Three parks, Mount Rainier, Olympic, and Delaware Water Gap, provide the setting for this survey‐based study, which considers how park visitors (N = 447) attribute responsibility for the cause of a hypothetical visitor accident. Results suggest that respondents tended to make more internal (i.e., related to characteristics of the victim), rather than external (i.e., related to characteristics of the park, or park management) attributions. As respondents viewed park‐related risk as controllable, they were more likely to attribute the cause of the accident to the victim. Moreover, among other significant variables, having experienced a similar accident predicted lower internal causal attribution. Opportunities for future research linking risk perception and attribution variables, as well as practical implications for the management of public outdoor settings, are presented.     

Perception and Communication of Flood Risks: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research

Flood hazards are the most common and destructive of all natural disasters. For decades, experts have been examining how flood losses can be mitigated. Just as in other risk domains, the study of risk perception and risk communication has gained increasing interest in flood risk management. Because of this research growth, a review of the state of the art in this domain is believed necessary. The review comprises 57 empirically based peer‐reviewed articles on flood risk perception and communication from the Web of Science and Scopus databases. The characteristics of these articles are listed in a comprehensive table, presenting research design, research variables, and key findings. From this review, it follows that the majority of studies are of exploratory nature and have not applied any of the theoretical frameworks that are available in social science research. Consequently, a methodological standardization in measuring and analyzing people's flood risk perceptions and their adaptive behaviors is hardly present. This heterogeneity leads to difficulties in comparing results among studies. It is also shown that theoretical and empirical studies on flood risk communication are nearly nonexistent. The article concludes with a summary on methodological issues in the fields of flood‐risk perception and flood‐risk communication and proposes an agenda for future research.     

A Social Network Contagion Theory of Risk Perception

Risk perceptions have, to a great extent, been studied exclusively as individual cognitive mechanisms in which individuals collect, process, and form perceptions as atomized units unconnected to a social system. These individual-level theories do not, however, help explain how perception of risk may vary between communities or within a single community. One alternative approach is based on a network theory of contagion. This approach, emerging largely from organizational and community social network studies, suggests that it is the relational aspects of individuals and the resulting networks and self-organizing systems that influence individual perceptions and build "groups or communities of like-minded" individuals. These social units, it is argued, behave as attitude, knowledge, or behavioral structures. The study reported in this article tests one aspect of this theoretical perspective. The central hypothesis proposes the existence of risk perception networks--relational groupings of individuals who share, and perhaps create, similar risk perceptions. To test this idea, data were collected from individuals involved in a community environmental conflict over a hazardous waste site cleanup. The statistical analysis used a matrix of relational social linkages to compare with a matrix of individual risk perceptions The analysis confirmed the hypothesis suggesting that social linkages in communities may play an important role in focusing risk perceptions.