Judgments of Personal and Environmental Risks of Consumer Products—Do they Differ?

Many psychometric studies have investigated judgments concerning personal risks from technologies, activities or consumer products, but only a few studies have included judgments of risk to the environment. Thus, little is known about this aspect of environmental risk perception, and whether it differs from personal risk perception. This study investigates risk judgments for 30 consumer products of various types such as herbal remedies, mobile telephones, genetically engineered drugs, or garden pesticides. A survey was conducted in two German cities: Leipzig and West Berlin. In total, 408 subjects evaluated the consumer products with regard to personal and environmental risk (and other risk-related aspects) and whether they would recommend the product to others. The findings show statistically significant differences between the mean values of perceived personal risk and environmental risk for most products. Despite these differences, the rank order of mean personal risk and environmental risk judgments for the products is quite similar. However, separate analyses for each product reveal that correlations between perceived personal and environmental risk vary strongly across products. Multiple regression analyses with personal and environmental risk judgments as predictors and product recommendation as criterion, run separately for each consumer product, show that it is mainly the judgment of perceived personal risk that explains product recommendation. Perceived risk to the environment adds little explanatory power. The study also explores differences in judgments of personal and environmental risk with regard to two sociodemographic variables: location (former East Germany vs. West Germany) and gender. Differences in both types of risk judgments are found with regard to location but not for gender.     

Further Thoughts on the Utility of Risk Matrices

Risk matrices are commonly encountered devices for rating hazards in numerous areas of risk management. Part of their popularity is predicated on their apparent simplicity and transparency. Recent research, however, has identified serious mathematical defects and inconsistencies. This article further examines the reliability and utility of risk matrices for ranking hazards, specifically in the context of public leisure activities including travel. We find that (1) different risk assessors may assign vastly different ratings to the same hazard, (2) even following lengthy reflection and learning scatter remains high, and (3) the underlying drivers of disparate ratings relate to fundamentally different worldviews, beliefs, and a panoply of psychosocial factors that are seldom explicitly acknowledged. It appears that risk matrices when used in this context may be creating no more than an artificial and even untrustworthy picture of the relative importance of hazards, which may be of little or no benefit to those trying to manage risk effectively and rationally.     

The Effects of Precautionary Messages about Electromagnetic Fields from Mobile Phones and Base Stations Revisited: The Role of Recipient Characteristics

Precautionary messages have been shown to increase recipients’ threat perceptions about radio‐frequency electromagnetic fields (RF‐EMFs) emitted by mobile phones and mobile phone base stations. The current study explored the interplay of variables on the side of message recipients with this effect. The individual difference variables of interest were gender, trait anxiety, personal need for structure, and personal fear of invalidity. Furthermore, the study determined whether the increased threat perception is accompanied by emotional distress. A total of 298 university students answered a survey after reading either a basic text about RF‐EMFs or a text including precautionary information. Linear multiple regression with interactions analyses showed that the effect of precautionary messages differed for people with different levels of trait anxiety. How trait anxiety was related to the effect of precautionary messages in turn depended on participants’ gender. Personal need for structure and personal fear of invalidity were mostly unrelated to the effect of precautionary messages. Regarding participants’ emotional distress, we found no difference in state anxiety scores between those participants who received precautionary information and those who did not. The findings show that the effects of precautionary messages on threat perception depend on individual difference variables such as recipients’ trait anxiety and gender. Also, the fact that precautionary communication did not result in heightened state anxiety challenges the assumption that precautionary messages induce fear or anxiety.     

Efficacy,Action, and Support for Reducing Climate Change Risks

A growing body of research demonstrates that believing action to reduce the risks of climate change is both possible (self‐efficacy) and effective (response efficacy) is essential to motivate and sustain risk mitigation efforts. Despite this potentially critical role of efficacy beliefs, measures and their use vary wildly in climate change risk perception and communication research, making it hard to compare and learn from efficacy studies. To address this problem and advance our understanding of efficacy beliefs, this article makes three contributions. First, we present a theoretically motivated approach to measuring climate change mitigation efficacy, in light of diverse proposed, perceived, and previously researched strategies. Second, we test this in two national survey samples (Amazon's Mechanical Turk N = 405, GfK Knowledge Panel N = 1,820), demonstrating largely coherent beliefs by level of action and discrimination between types of efficacy. Four additive efficacy scales emerge: personal self‐efficacy, personal response efficacy, government and collective self‐efficacy, and government and collective response efficacy. Third, we employ the resulting efficacy scales in mediation models to test how well efficacy beliefs predict climate change policy support, controlling for specific knowledge, risk perceptions, and ideology, and allowing for mediation by concern. Concern fully mediates the relatively strong effects of perceived risk on policy support, but only partly mediates efficacy beliefs. Stronger government and collective response efficacy beliefs and personal self‐efficacy beliefs are both directly and indirectly associated with greater support for reducing the risks of climate change, even after controlling for ideology and causal beliefs about climate change.     

Conventional Wisdom on Risk Communication and Evidence from a Field Experiment

A recent comprehensive review of the literature identified a number of facts and principles governing risk communication. This paper evaluates several of these propositions using recent evidence from a field experiment in communicating the risks from radon in homes. At this point in the research, data relates primarily to the response of risk perceptions to different information treatments and different personal characteristics. The effect of various causal factors is sensitive to the particular test of risk perception applied. No information treatment was clearly superior for all tasks. An important implication of these findings is that risk communicators must determine what specific task or tasks the information program should enable people to do.     

Government Risk Management Priorities: A Comparison of the Preferences of Asian Indian Americans and Other Americans

A survey was conducted of approximately 200 Asian Indian Americans and 200 other residents of New Jersey in order to understand the risk management priorities that they want government to have. We found that Asian Indian Americans, especially younger women, focused on personal/family risks, such as alcohol and drug abuse, sexual abuse, and domestic violence. The New Jersey comparison group, in contrast, placed war/terrorism and loss of health care services and insurance at the top of their priorities for government. These results suggest stressful acculturation-related issues within the Asian Indian community. Both populations want more risk management from government than they believe government is currently providing. Respondents who wanted more from government tended to dread the risk, be fearful of the consequences, trust government, and have a feeling of personal efficacy. Within the Asian Indian American sample, wide variations were observed by language spoken at home and religious affiliation. Notably, Muslims and Hindi language speakers tended not to trust government and hence wanted less government involvement. This study supports our call for studies of recent migrant populations and Johnson's for testing ethnic identity and acculturation as factors in risk judgments.     

“What—Me Worry?”1“Why So Serious?”:2 A Personal View on the Fukushima Nuclear Reactor Accidents

Infrequently, it seems that a significant accident precursor or, worse, an actual accident, involving a commercial nuclear power reactor occurs to remind us of the need to reexamine the safety of this important electrical power technology from a risk perspective. Twenty‐five years since the major core damage accident at Chernobyl in the Ukraine, the Fukushima reactor complex in Japan experienced multiple core damages as a result of an earthquake‐induced tsunami beyond either the earthquake or tsunami design basis for the site. Although the tsunami itself killed tens of thousands of people and left the area devastated and virtually uninhabitable, much concern still arose from the potential radioactive releases from the damaged reactors, even though there was little population left in the area to be affected. As a lifelong probabilistic safety analyst in nuclear engineering, even I must admit to a recurrence of the doubt regarding nuclear power safety after Fukushima that I had experienced after Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. This article is my attempt to “recover” my personal perspective on acceptable risk by examining both the domestic and worldwide history of commercial nuclear power plant accidents and attempting to quantify the risk in terms of the frequency of core damage that one might glean from a review of operational history.     

Risk Assessment Can Be a Game‐Changing Information Technology—But Too Often It Isn't

The printing press was a game‐changing information technology. Risk assessment could be also. At present, risk assessments are commonly used as one‐time decision aids: they provide justification for a particular decision, and afterwards usually sit on a shelf. However, when viewed as information technologies, their potential uses are much broader. Risk assessments: (1) are repositories of structured information and a medium for communication; (2) embody evaluative structures for setting priorities; (3) can preserve information over time and permit asynchronous communication, thus encouraging learning and adaptation; and (4) explicitly address uncertain futures. Moreover, because of their “what‐if” capabilities, risk assessments can serve as a platform for constructive discussion among parties that hold different values. The evolution of risk assessment in the nuclear industry shows how such attributes have been used to lower core‐melt risks substantially through improved templates for maintenance and more effective coordination with regulators (although risk assessment has been less commonly used in improving emergency‐response capabilities). The end result of this evolution in the nuclear industry has been the development of “living” risk assessments that are updated more or less in real time to answer even routine operational questions. Similar but untapped opportunities abound for the use of living risk assessments to reduce risks in small operational decisions as well as large policy decisions in other areas of hazard management. They can also help improve understanding of and communication about risks, and future risk assessment and management. Realization of these opportunities will require significant changes in incentives and active promotion by the risk analytic community.     

The science of leadership: A journey from survey research to field experimentation

This is a personal account of the stages through which my thinking and my research career unfolded, beginning with student socialization into questionnaire-based survey research, through originating implicit leadership theory, to initiating “respite research” to study the effects of stress on strain without causal ambiguity, and finally to my adoption of field experimentation as the most internally and externally valid research method. It was a journey of breaking free of popular survey research methods and embracing causally unambiguous experimentation. It struck home for many, inasmuch as almost all the articles that my students and colleagues and I submitted reporting randomized field experiments were accepted for publication in top-tier journals. I describe my transition from survey research to field experimentation as it unfolded, provide successive examples of field experiments, and press home the major lesson: field experiments are doable, replicatable, and causally unambiguous. Moreover, they provide actionable cause-and-effect results that can propel our science forward and put useful tools into the hands of practitioners.     

Cases of real-life policies related to risk: How can they enhance risk analysis and risk science?

Policies on risk constitute a core topic of risk analysis and risk science, and it is common at risk conferences to present real-life cases of such policies, for example related to the handling of climate change and pandemics. Although these are of broad interest, showing how important issues in society are dealt with, it can be questioned to what extent and how these cases contribute to enhancing risk analysis and risk science. The present paper addresses this concern. It is argued that, in order to learn from the cases, they need in general to be more thoroughly followed up with discussions of concepts, principles, approaches, and methods for assessing, characterizing, communicating and handling risk. Describing a governmental policy on, for example, the handling of COVID-19 is a point of departure for interesting discussions concerning its justification and performance, in particular in relation to risk and the most updated knowledge from the risk analysis field. Such discussions are, however, often lacking. The paper points to some key obstacles and challenges for the learning process, including the difficulty of distinguishing between policies, policy analysis, and politics.     

Personal development plans supporting employee learning and perceived performance: the moderating role of self-directedness

Due to developments in the current dynamic business environment which is more global and competitive than ever, employees’ lifelong learning and the way organizations support their continuous development are pivotal. Many organizations introduce personal development plans (PDPs) to support employees’ learning, however, not always taking into account their personal characteristics. This study had a twofold purpose as it was designed to explore on the one hand the relationship between PDPs in the workplace with employee’s undertaking of learning activities and perceived performance, and on the other hand the possible moderating role of employee self-directedness on this relationship. For this study, data collected by means of a questionnaire at two different organizations were used, one organization foregoing profit and one non-profit activity. The results indicated significant positive relations between the individual supporting factor ‘employee learning and reflection’ and the undertaking of learning activities and perceived performance and between employee self-directedness and the undertaking of learning activities and perceived performance. The same accounted for the moderating effect of employee self-directedness on the interaction between learning and reflection and perceived performance. Some findings were surprising, nevertheless resulted in valuable insights and implications for practice.     

Perceptions of Nuclear and Other Risks in Japan and the United States

As part of a study of nuclear power development in Japan and the United States, surveys of perceptions of risk toward 30 activities, substances, and technologies have been carried out in the Pacific Northwest and Tokyo, Japan. The results show that people in both countries have the highest level of dread toward nuclear waste disposal, nuclear accidents, and nuclear war, greater even than their dread of crime and AIDS. In addition to comparisons of dread, the paper also discusses similarities and differences between Japanese and American responses for other dimensions of risk perception.     

I can't believe they think I'd...

Many physician executives experience a personal jolt as they move to work in a very different relationship with their colleagues. What happens? How can we understand this phenomenon? What can we do to minimize the personal toll so often exacted by the transition to leadership? This paper will focus on these essential questions. The inevitable discomfort encountered during this learning curve, which can last from two months to two years, often comes as a surprise. Many physicians who have been elevated to leadership positions because of their success and interpersonal acceptance, have not had to struggle with this sense of being "a fish out of water" since very early in their professional careers. Unless there is someone in place to reassure and mentor, the resulting confusion can be quite unnerving, resulting in reflex defensiveness.     

Does Communicating (Flood) Risk Affect (Flood) Risk Perceptions? Results of a Quasi‐Experimental Study

People's risk perceptions are generally regarded as an important determinant of their decisions to adjust to natural hazards. However, few studies have evaluated how risk communication programs affect these risk perceptions. This study evaluates the effects of a small-scale flood risk communication program in the Netherlands, consisting of workshops and focus group discussions. The effects on the workshop participants' ( n  = 24) and focus group participants' ( n  = 16) flood risk perceptions were evaluated in a pretest-posttest control group ( n  = 40) design that focused on two mechanisms of attitude change—direct personal experience and attitude polarization. We expected that (H1) workshop participants would show greater shifts in their flood risk perceptions compared with control group participants and that (H2) focus groups would rather produce the conditions for attitude polarization (shifts toward more extreme attitudinal positions after group discussion). However, the results provide only modest support for these hypotheses, perhaps because of a mismatch between the sessions' contents and the risk perception measures. An important contribution of this study is that it examined risk perception data by both conventional tests of the mean differences and tests for attitude polarization. Moreover, the possibility that attitude polarization could cause people to confirm their preexisting (hazard) beliefs could have important implications for risk communication.     

Foundational Challenges for Advancing the Field and Discipline of Risk Analysis

Risk analysis as a field and discipline is about concepts, principles, approaches, methods, and models for understanding, assessing, communicating, managing, and governing risk. The foundation of this field and discipline has been subject to continuous discussion since its origin some 40 years ago with the establishment of the Society for Risk Analysis and the Risk Analysis journal. This article provides a perspective on critical foundational challenges that this field and discipline faces today, for risk analysis to develop and have societal impact. Topics discussed include fundamental questions important for defining the risk field, discipline, and science; the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary features of risk analysis; the interactions and dependencies with other sciences; terminology and fundamental principles; and current developments and trends, such as the use of artificial intelligence.     

Unravelling Learning within Multinational Corporations*

This article explores the impact of institutional variation on the extent to which subsidiary firms learn from multinational corporations. Learning is conceptualized here as consisting of two aspects: knowledge flow and reinforcement of or change in routines to incorporate the behaviourist assumptions of learning into the international business field. The research is based on in‐depth case studies that systematically compare the ways in which parent company knowledge diffuses to Polish, Turkish, Italian and German subsidiary firms in the chemical industry. The findings show that even though firms face the same global pressure to integrate and pursue the same international strategy, their learning outcomes are not the same. There is heterogeneous learning as a result of differences in the institutional context of home countries. Where institutional structures are not favourable to learning, the proactive or reactive orientation of actors to identifying future needs and modifying existing schemata – which highlight the importance of human agency – is significant in explaining learning.