The Role of Interdisciplinary Analysis in Bridging the Gap Between the Technical and Human Sides of Risk Assessment1

It is readily observable that there is a wide gulf between the manner by which the lay public and the manner by which technical experts assess the risks of complex technologies and assimilate these assessments in decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of technological options. On the public side, this gap in methods and value assessments is a major source of distrust of technical experts and disaffection with the social management of technology. From the viewpoint of the technical experts who introduce or regulate technologies, this gap is both a cauldron of frustration and a perceived justification for paternalistic technocratic decision-making that further alienates important segments of the public. It is the author's belief that unless our society learns how to progress in bridging these gaps within the framework of a comparative mode of risk-cost-benefit analysis of options, the potential net benefits of certain technologies such as commercial nuclear power could well be lost to our society. Research on public risk perception, while potentially an important component in achieving this objective, needs to be restructured from its present static orientation to meet the needs of forward-looking decision-making that accommodates dynamic learning processes of both the public and technical experts as well as the “learning curves” of technological improvements historically accompanying successful innovations. Moreover, no less attention needs to be devoted to improved benefit assessment along with ethical and equity considerations in decision-making involving the reconciliation of conflict between individual and societal interests. This paper examines the vital importance of interdisciplinary analysis in fulfilling these needs.     

System Perspectives of Experts and Farmers Regarding the Role of Livelihood Assets in Risk Perception: Results from the Structured Mental Model Approach

Pesticide application is increasing and despite extensive educational programs farmers continue to take high health and environmental risks when applying pesticides.
The structured mental model approach (SMMA) is a new method for risk perception analysis. It embeds farmers' risk perception into their livelihood system in the elaboration of a mental model (MM). Results from its first application are presented here. The study region is Vereda la Hoya (Colombia), an area characterized by subsistence farming, high use of pesticides, and a high incidence of health problems. Our hypothesis was that subsistence farmers were constrained by economic, environmental, and sociocultural factors, which consequently should influence their mental models.
Thirteen experts and 10 farmers were interviewed and their MMs of the extended pesticide system elicited. The interviews were open-ended with the questions structured in three parts: (i) definition and ranking of types of capital with respect to their importance for the sustainability of farmers' livelihood; (ii) understanding the system and its dynamics; and (iii) importance of the agents in the farmers' agent network. Following this structure, each part of the interview was analyzed qualitatively and statistically. Our analyses showed that the mental models of farmers and experts differed significantly from each other.
By applying the SMMA, we were also able to identify reasons for the divergence of experts' and farmers' MMs. Of major importance are the following factors: (i) culture and tradition; (ii) trust in the source of information; and (iii) feedback on knowledge.     

Limits of Knowledge and the Limited Importance of Trust

Perceived risk and related attitudes have been implicated as major factors in many of the difficult policy problems that face modern society (nuclear power, genetically modified food, etc). Experts often argue that no or very small risks are involved; people are still worried. Why? The standard answer is lack of trust. Data on trust and risk perception, however, point to only a weak relationship between the two (r approximately 0.3). It is suggested here that the reason for the surprisingly minor importance of trust is that people believe that there are clear limits to how much science and experts know. Results are presented from studies of risk perception of the public, experts, and politicians. Politicians and members of the public believe that there are many unknown effects of technology and such beliefs were strongly related to their perceived risk. Experts on nuclear waste, on the other hand, seemed to believe that little is unknown in their field of expertise. Regression analyses of risk perception showed the unknown‐effects factor to be a more important explanatory factor than trust for the public and politicians.     

Illustrating Risk: Anaphylaxis Through the Eyes of the Food‐Allergic Child

The risk perception research is widely focused on children as targets of risk. To date, very few studies have consulted with the impacted group to assess the perceptions of risk associated with the exposures of interest. Much less research has investigated the experiences of children at risk for anaphylaxis, their concerns, and the psychosocial stresses associated with risk. The present study explores the perceptions and experiences of Ontario students with anaphylaxis, and their parents regarding school as a safe place in order to inform school policy around risk management and coping. A “child‐centered” analytical framework incorporating illustrative techniques within interpretative analysis is outlined. Five prominent themes: (a) social and environmental barriers to safety, (b) coping strategies, (c) emotional burden of responsibility, (d) balance of responsibility (transitions), and (e) redefining “normal” are discussed. Results found that “child‐centered” techniques empowered children in a process that is meaningful and relevant to their lives. A preliminary framework for understanding what risk means to children highlighted the differences in how they cope in the public sphere of school.     

Hazard Perception, Risk Perception, and the Need for Decontamination by Residents Exposed to Soil Pollution: The Role of Sustainability and the Limits of Expert Knowledge

This case study examines the hazard and risk perception and the need for decontamination according to people exposed to soil pollution. Using an ecological-symbolic approach (ESA), a multidisciplinary model is developed that draws upon psychological and sociological perspectives on risk perception and includes ecological variables by using data from experts' risk assessments. The results show that hazard perception is best predicted by objective knowledge, subjective knowledge, estimated knowledge of experts, and the assessed risks. However, experts' risk assessments induce an increase in hazard perception only when residents know the urgency of decontamination. Risk perception is best predicted by trust in the risk management. Additionally, need for decontamination relates to hazard perception, risk perception, estimated knowledge of experts, and thoughts about sustainability. In contrast to the knowledge deficit model, objective and subjective knowledge did not significantly relate to risk perception and need for decontamination. The results suggest that residents can make a distinction between hazards in terms of the seriousness of contamination on the one hand, and human health risks on the other hand. Moreover, next to the importance of social determinants of environmental risk perception, this study shows that the output of experts' risk assessments—or the objective risks—can create a hazard awareness rather than an alarming risk consciousness, despite residents' distrust of scientific knowledge.     

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.     

Lay and Expert Interpretations of Cancer Cluster Evidence

Conflict frequently occurs between community members and environmental/public health officials when an unusual number of cancer cases is reported. This conflict may result from different ways in which laypeople and experts interpret facts to judge whether there is an environmental cause of the cancer cases, but little is known about this issue. Volunteer laypeople (N= 551) and epidemiologists (N= 105) read a hypothetical scenario about cases of cancer on one neighborhood block. Participants judged whether each of the 23 facts about the situation made it “much more likely” to “much less likely” that something in town was causing the cancer cases (7‐point scale). The facts were designed to be “alarming,”“reassuring,” or “neutral” (i.e., according to epidemiological principles, should increase, decrease, or have no impact on the likelihood of an environmental cause). The laypeople were alarmed by most of the facts (mean response significantly greater than the scale midpoint), including all of the neutral facts and over half of the reassuring facts. The experts were more balanced: they were alarmed by none of the neutral or reassuring facts. Their responses showed significantly less alarm than the laypeople's responses (p < 0.0001 for all comparisons). This study reveals that laypeople are not reassured by information that substantially lowers the chance of an environmental cause for cancer cases. Lay responses differ significantly and systematically from experts who are far less alarmed by relevant facts. These findings may help explain the conflicts between the two groups in situations where concern about cases of cancer arises in a community.     

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.     

Perception of Earthquake Risk in Taiwan: Effects of Gender and Past Earthquake Experience

This study explored how individuals in Taiwan perceive the risk of earthquake and the relationship of past earthquake experience and gender to risk perception. Participants (n= 1,405), including earthquake survivors and those in the general population without prior direct earthquake exposure, were selected and interviewed through a computer‐assisted telephone interviewing procedure using a random sampling and stratification method covering all 24 regions of Taiwan. A factor analysis of the interview data yielded a two‐factor structure of risk perception in regard to earthquake. The first factor, “personal impact,” encompassed perception of threat and fear related to earthquakes. The second factor, “controllability,” encompassed a sense of efficacy of self‐protection in regard to earthquakes. The findings indicated prior earthquake survivors and females reported higher scores on the personal impact factor than males and those with no prior direct earthquake experience, although there were no group differences on the controllability factor. The findings support that risk perception has multiple components, and suggest that past experience (survivor status) and gender (female) affect the perception of risk. Exploration of potential contributions of other demographic factors such as age, education, and marital status to personal impact, especially for females and survivors, is discussed. Future research on and intervention program with regard to risk perception are suggested accordingly.     

Comparative Risk and Policy Analysis in Environmental Health

There is increasing interest in the integration of quantitative risk analysis with benefit-cost and cost-effectiveness methods to evaluate environmental health policy making and perform comparative analyses. However, the combined use of these methods has revealed deficiencies in the available methods, and the lack of useful analytical frameworks currently constrains the utility of comparative risk and policy analyses. A principal issue in integrating risk and economic analysis is the lack of common performance metrics, particularly when conducting comparative analyses of regulations with disparate health endpoints (e.g., cancer and noncancer effects or risk-benefit analysis) and quantitative estimation of cumulative risk, whether from exposure to single agents with multiple health impacts or from exposure to mixtures. We propose a general quantitative framework and examine assumptions required for performing analyses of health risks and policies. We review existing and proposed risk and health-impact metrics for evaluating policies designed to protect public health from environmental exposures, and identify their strengths and weaknesses with respect to their use in a general comparative risk and policy analysis framework. Case studies are presented to demonstrate applications of this framework with risk-benefit and air pollution risk analyses. Through this analysis, we hope to generate discussions regarding the data requirements, analytical approaches, and assumptions required for general models to be used in comparative risk and policy analysis.     

Mind the gap: The role of leadership in multiteam system collective cognition

The increasing prevalence of team-based organizations places a premium on leadership that will “mind the gap” and enable smooth synchronization of activities across multiple distinct teams. Prior work shows that leaders can be trained to directly facilitate between-team coordination processes. Yet, relatively little is known about the intervening psychological mechanisms that enable between-team coordination. Here, we advance multiteam-interaction mental models—cognitive structures containing knowledge of appropriate between-team activities—as one mechanism that facilitates coordination among multiple teams. We use leader and team cognition data gathered in DeChurch and Marks' (2006) MTS study to test these ideas. Results reveal leaders' multiteam-interaction mental model accuracy “transfers” to teams through strategic communication, and leader strategic communication enables between-team coordination by promoting accuracy in followers' mental models. This study highlights the importance of leadership for developing collective cognition that allows teams to “scale up” from small stand-alone teams to larger and more complex systems.     

A Framework for Understanding Risk Perception,Explored from the Perspective of the Water Practitioner

Sustainable urban water systems are likely to be hybrids of centralized and decentralized infrastructure, managed as an integrated system in water‐sensitive cities. The technology for many of these systems is available. However, social and institutional barriers, which can be understood as deeply embedded risk perceptions, have impeded their implementation. Risk perceptions within the water sector are often unrecognized or unacknowledged, despite their role in risk management generally in informing value judgments and specifically in ranking risks to achieve management objectives. There has been very little examination of the role of these risk perceptions in advancing more sustainable water supply management through the adoption of alternative sources. To address this gap, this article presents a framework that can be used as a tool for understanding risk perceptions. The framework is built on the relational theory of risk and presents the range of human phenomena that might influence the perception of an “object at risk” in relation to a “risk object.” It has been synthesized from a critical review of theoretical, conceptual, and empirical studies of perception broadly and risk perception specifically, and interpreted in relation to water practitioners. For a water practitioner, the risk object might be an alternative water system, a component, a process, or a technology, and the object at risk could be public or environmental health, profitability, or professional reputation. This framework has two important functions: to allow practitioners to understand their own and others’ risk perceptions, which might differ, and to inform further empirical research.     

Expert and Public Perception of Risk from Biotechnology

Risk perceptions of a series of biotechnology applications were examined in a public (nonexpert) sample and an expert sample. Compared with the experts, the public perceived all biotechnology applications as more risky. Both groups perceived food-related applications to be riskier than medical applications. Compared with the public, experts perceived both food and medical applications as less harmful and more useful. Experts also judged the risks posed from medical biotechnology applications as more familiar and acknowledged by people and science. Lay estimates of the risk of food applications were predicted by potential harm, potential benefits, science knowledge, and familiarity; experts' estimates were predicted only by harm and benefits. Lay estimates of the risk of medical applications were predicted by potential harm; experts' estimates were predicted by potential benefits, number and type of people exposed, and science knowledge. We discuss the implications of the results for risk communication about and management of different types of biotechnologies.     

Social Contagion of Risk Perceptions in Environmental Management Networks

An important requisite for improving risk communication practice related to contentious environmental issues is having a better theoretical understanding of how risk perceptions function in real‐world social systems. Our study applied Scherer and Cho's social network contagion theory of risk perception (SNCTRP) to cormorant management (a contentious environmental management issue) in the Great Lakes Basin to: (1) assess contagion effects on cormorant‐related risk perceptions and individual factors believed to influence those perceptions and (2) explore the extent of social contagion in a full network (consisting of interactions between and among experts and laypeople) and three “isolated” models separating different types of interactions from the full network (i.e., expert‐to‐expert, layperson‐to‐layperson, and expert‐to‐layperson). We conducted interviews and administered questionnaires with experts (e.g., natural resource professionals) and laypeople (e.g., recreational and commercial anglers, business owners, bird enthusiasts) engaged in cormorant management in northern Lake Huron (n = 115). Our findings generally support the SNCTRP; however, the scope and scale of social contagion varied considerably based on the variables (e.g., individual risk perception factors), actors (i.e., experts or laypeople), and interactions of interest. Contagion effects were identified more frequently, and were stronger, in the models containing interactions between experts and laypeople than in those models containing only interactions among experts or laypeople.     

The Perceived Health Risks of Indoor Radon Gas and Overhead Powerlines: A Comparative Multilevel Approach

Radon and overhead powerlines are two radiation risk cases that have raised varying levels of concern among the general public and experts. Despite both involving radiation—a typically feared and unseen health hazard—individuals' perceptions of the two risk cases may invoke rather different factors. We examined individual and geographic-contextual factors influencing public perceptions of the health risks of indoor radon gas and overhead powerlines in a comparative research design, utilizing a postal questionnaire with 1,528 members of the general public (response rate 28%) and multilevel modeling techniques. This study found that beliefs about the two risk cases mainly differed according to the level of "exposure"—defined here in terms of spatial proximity. We argue that there are two alternative explanations for this pattern of findings: that risk perception itself varies directly with proximity, or that risk is more salient to concerned people in the exposed areas. We also found that while people living in high radon areas are more concerned about the risks of indoor radon gas, they find these risks more acceptable and have more trust in authorities. These results might reflect the positive effects of successive radon campaigns in high radon areas, which may have raised awareness and concern, and at the same time may have helped to increase trust by showing that the government takes the health risks of indoor radon gas seriously, suggesting that genuine risk communication initiatives may have positive impacts on trust in risk management institutions.     

What Motivates Individuals to Protect Themselves from Risks: The Case of Wildland Fires

This research investigates the cognitive perceptual process that homeowners go through when faced with the decision to protect themselves from the risk of wildfires. This decision can be examined by looking at the interaction between the integrated protection motivation theory-transtheoretical model and different levels of homeowners' subjective knowledge related to wildfire risks. We investigated the role of motivation, decision stages of risk readiness, and subjective knowledge on the number of risk-mitigating actions undertaken by homeowners living in high-risk communities. The results indicate that homeowners who are in an early or precontemplative stage (both low and high subjective knowledge) as well as low knowledge contemplatives are motivated by their perceived degree of vulnerability to mitigate the risk. In contrast, high knowledge contemplatives' potential behavioral changes are more likely to be motivated by increasing their perceptions of the severity of the risk. Risk-mitigating behaviors undertaken by high knowledge action homeowners are influenced by their perceptions of risk severity, self-efficacy, and response efficacy. In contrast, the low knowledge action homeowners engage in risk reduction behaviors without the influence of any of the PMT variables; demonstrating their motivation to emulate others in their community. These results have implications for the type of information that should be used to effectively communicate risks in an effort to influence the diverse homeowner segments to engage in risk-reduction behaviors.     

Antecedents of Job Satisfaction,Organizational Commitment and Stress in a Public Hospital: a P-E Fit Perspective

This article tests different P-E (person-environment) fit dimensions in order to assess their impact on three work outcomes: job satisfaction; organizational commitment; and stress perception. Findings shows that P-E fit dimensions have differentiated effects on its dependent variables. This study contributes to several important academic discussions. The first concerns the model tested, which contains several P-E fit dimensions. The second scientific contribution is to consider P-E fit dimensions as antecedents of three job outcomes. The third contribution concerns the development and testing of a new P-E fit dimension called “person-reforms” fit.     

Knowledge,Risk Perceptions,and Xenophobic Attitudes: Evidence from Italy During the Ebola Outbreak

The purposes of the current study were twofold: (1) to investigate affective and cognitive responses and social‐contextual factors related to Ebola and their intercorrelations in a developed country without widespread Ebola transmission; and (2) to examine the relationships among risk perception of Ebola, levels of knowledge about Ebola, and (blatant and subtle) prejudice toward African immigrants. Between January 2015 and March 2015, an anonymous cross‐sectional survey was conducted among a convenience sample of 486 Italian adults. Results showed that most participants were not particularly concerned about Ebola and did not feel at risk of acquiring the virus. Cognitive dimensions of risk perception of Ebola (i.e., perceived severity of illness, perceived personal impact, perceived coping efficacy, and likelihood of infection), affective response (or worry) to Ebola, and social‐contextual factors (i.e., perceived preparedness of institutions, family members’ and friends’ levels of worry) were interrelated. Prejudice toward African immigrants was positively related to risk perception of Ebola and negatively related to levels of knowledge about Ebola even when controlling for sociodemographic variables including political preference.