Emotions,Trust, and Perceived Risk: Affective and Cognitive Routes to Flood Preparedness Behavior

Despite the prognoses of the effects of global warming (e.g., rising sea levels, increasing river discharges), few international studies have addressed how flood preparedness should be stimulated among private citizens. This article aims to predict Dutch citizens’ flood preparedness intentions by testing a path model, including previous flood hazard experiences, trust in public flood protection, and flood risk perceptions (both affective and cognitive components). Data were collected through questionnaire surveys in two coastal communities (n= 169, n= 244) and in one river area community (n= 658). Causal relations were tested by means of structural equation modeling (SEM). Overall, the results indicate that both cognitive and affective mechanisms influence citizens’ preparedness intentions. First, a higher level of trust reduces citizens’ perceptions of flood likelihood, which in turn hampers their flood preparedness intentions (cognitive route). Second, trust also lessens the amount of dread evoked by flood risk, which in turn impedes flood preparedness intentions (affective route). Moreover, the affective route showed that levels of dread were especially influenced by citizens’ negative and positive emotions related to their previous flood hazard experiences. Negative emotions most often reflected fear and powerlessness, while positive emotions most frequently reflected feelings of solidarity. The results are consistent with the affect heuristic and the historical context of Dutch flood risk management. The great challenge for flood risk management is the accommodation of both cognitive and affective mechanisms in risk communications, especially when most people lack an emotional basis stemming from previous flood hazard events.     

Personal Values, Beliefs, and Ecological Risk Perception

A mail survey on ecological risk perception was administered in the summer of 2002 to a randomized sample of the lay public and to selected risk professionals at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). The ranking of 24 ecological risk items, from global climate change to commercial fishing, reveals that the lay public is more concerned about low-probability, high-consequence risks whereas the risk professionals are more concerned about risks that pose long-term, ecosystem-level impacts. To test the explanatory power of the value-belief-norm (VBN) theory for risk perception, respondents were questioned about their personal values, spiritual beliefs, and worldviews. The most consistent predictors of the risk rankings are belief in the new ecological paradigm (NEP) and Schwartz's altruism. The NEP and Schwartz's altruism explain from 19% to 46% of the variance in the risk rankings. Religious beliefs account for less than 6% of the variance and do not show a consistent pattern in predicting risk perception although religious fundamentalists are generally less concerned about the risk items. While not exerting as strong an impact, social-structural variables do have some influence on risk perception. Ethnicities show no effect on the risk scales but the more educated and financially well-off are less concerned about the risk items. Political leanings have no direct influence on risk rankings, but indirectly affect rankings through the NEP. These results reveal that the VBN theory is a plausible explanation for the differences measured in the respondents' perception of ecological risk.     

Risk Perception,Experience, and Objective Risk: A Cross‐National Study with European Emergency Survivors

Understanding public risk perceptions and their underlying processes is important in order to learn more about the way people interpret and respond to hazardous emergency events. Direct experience with an involuntary hazard has been found to heighten the perceived risk of experiencing the same hazard and its consequences in the future, but it remains unclear if cross‐over effects are possible (i.e., experience with one hazard influencing perceived risk for other hazards also). Furthermore, the impact of objective risk and country of residence on perceived risk is not well understood. As part of the BeSeCu (Behavior, Security, and Culture) Project, a sample of 1,045 survivors of emergencies from seven European countries (i.e., Germany, the Czech Republic, Poland, Sweden, Spain, Turkey, and Italy) was drawn. Results revealed heightened perceived risk for emergency events (i.e., domestic and public fires, earthquakes, floods, and terrorist attacks) when the event had been experienced previously plus some evidence of cross‐over effects, although these effects were not so strong. The largest country differences in perceived risk were observed for earthquakes, but this effect was significantly reduced by taking into account the objective earthquake risk. For fires, floods, terrorist attacks, and traffic accidents, only small country differences in perceived risk were found. Further studies including a larger number of countries are welcomed.     

An emotion-based model of risk perception and stigma susceptibility: cognitive appraisals of emotion, affective reactivity, worldviews, and risk perceptions in the generation of technological stigma.

A study (N=198) was conducted to examine hypotheses derived from an emotion-based model of stigma responses to radiation sources. A model of stigma susceptibility is proposed in which affective reactions and cognitive worldviews activate predispositions to appraise and experience events in systematic ways that result in the generation of negative emotion, risk perceptions, and stigma responses. Results of structural equation modeling supported the hypotheses. Radiation sources that scored higher on a measure of stigma were included in the analyses (i.e., nuclear power plants, radioactive waste from nuclear power plants, radiation from nuclear weapons testing). Individual differences in negative reactivity and worldviews were associated with the strength of emotional appraisals that were associated, in turn, with negative emotion toward stigmatized radiation sources. As hypothesized, the model fit better with perceived risk as a function of negative emotion rather than vice versa. Finally, a measure of stigma was associated with negative emotion and, to a lesser extent, with risk perceptions. Risk communication about stigmatized objects may benefit from a more complete understanding of how affective and emotional reactions are constructed and the routes through which they affect responses and behaviors.     

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.     

Risk Perception and Experience: Hazard Personality Profiles and Individual Differences

The dominance of the "psychometric" paradigm and the consequent emphasis on personality profiles of hazards has resulted in little attention being given to individual variability in risk judgments. This study examines how far differences in experience of risk activities can explain individual variability in risk assessments. A questionnaire study (n = 172) was used to explore the relationships between experience and risk perceptions in relation to 16 risk activities. It was expected that these relationships would differ for voluntary and involuntary activities. Measures of experience included assessments of "impact" and "outcome" valence as well as "frequency." These three aspects of experience each related to risk assessment but their relationship depended on whether the risk experiences were voluntary or not. The results indicate the importance of developing more fine-grained ways of indexing risk experience.     

Decision-Making, Time Horizons, and Risk in the Very Long-Term Perspective

Some decisions made today have far-reaching consequences as exemplified by those concerning nuclear power and spent nuclear fuel. The investigation presented here uses a decision theoretic framework in which time horizons and the discounting of negative consequences play significant roles. The results indicated wide variations in the lengths of the planning horizons judged to be adequate not only across a number of activities, including nuclear waste management, but also across groups of subjects (e.g., engineering students, retired people, and nuclear fuel experts). The paper reports typical judgments and correlations between different variables for different groups of subjects. The differences across groups reflect potential sources of conflict, depending in part on different values and different perceptions of more or less uncertain facts. Discounting functions for negative consequences in the future were also established. A range in differences in the speed of discounting were found and illustrated. Furthermore, it was found that substantial proportions in all groups regarded negative consequences related to nuclear waste as nondiscountable. When asked about the effect of time until outcome on acceptable probability of a negative outcome, many subjects used the probability concept in an incoherent way, illustrating the great difficulty in communicating small probabilities in a long-term risk context.     

Empirical Analysis of Farmers' Drought Risk Perception: Objective Factors,Personal Circumstances,and Social Influence

Drought‐induced water shortage and salinization are a global threat to agricultural production. With climate change, drought risk is expected to increase as drought events are assumed to occur more frequently and to become more severe. The agricultural sector's adaptive capacity largely depends on farmers’ drought risk perceptions. Understanding the formation of farmers’ drought risk perceptions is a prerequisite to designing effective and efficient public drought risk management strategies. Various strands of literature point at different factors shaping individual risk perceptions. Economic theory points at objective risk variables, whereas psychology and sociology identify subjective risk variables. This study investigates and compares the contribution of objective and subjective factors in explaining farmers’ drought risk perception by means of survey data analysis. Data on risk perceptions, farm characteristics, and various other personality traits were collected from farmers located in the southwest Netherlands. From comparing the explanatory power of objective and subjective risk factors in separate models and a full model of risk perception, it can be concluded that farmers’ risk perceptions are shaped by both rational and emotional factors. In a full risk perception model, being located in an area with external water supply, owning fields with salinization issues, cultivating drought‐/salt‐sensitive crops, farm revenue, drought risk experience, and perceived control are significant explanatory variables of farmers’ drought risk perceptions.     

Examining the Relationship Between Affect and Implicit Associations: Implications for Risk Perception

It has been suggested that affect may play an important role in risk perception. Slovic et al. argued that people make use of the “affect heuristic” when assessing risks because it is easier and more efficient to rely on spontaneous affective reactions than to analyze all available information. In the present studies, a single category implicit association test (SC‐IAT) to measure associations evoked by different hazards was employed. In the first study, we tested the extent to which the SC‐IAT corresponds to the theoretical construct of affect in a risk framework. Specifically, we found that the SC‐IAT correlates with other explicit measures that claim to measure affect, as well as with a measure of trust, but not with a measure that captures a different construct (subjective knowledge). In the second study, we addressed the question of whether hazards that vary along the dread dimension of the psychometric paradigm also differ in the affect they evoke. The results of the SC‐IAT indicated that a high‐dread hazard (nuclear power) elicits negative associations. Moreover, the high‐dread hazard evoked more negative associations than a medium‐dread hazard (hydroelectric power). In contrast, a nondread hazard (home appliances) led to positive associations. The results of our study highlight the importance of affect in shaping attitudes and opinions toward risks. The results further suggest that implicit measures may provide valuable insight into people's risk perception above and beyond explicit measures.     

sCARy! Risk Perceptions in Autonomous Driving: The Influence of Experience on Perceived Benefits and Barriers

The increasing development of autonomous vehicles (AVs) influences the future of transportation. Beyond the potential benefits in terms of safety, efficiency, and comfort, also potential risks of novel driving technologies need to be addressed. In this article, we explore risk perceptions toward connected and autonomous driving in comparison to conventional driving. In order to gain a deeper understanding of individual risk perceptions, we adopted a two‐step empirical procedure. First, focus groups ( $N=17$) were carried out to identify relevant risk factors for autonomous and connected driving. Further, a questionnaire was developed, which was answered by 516 German participants. In the questionnaire, three driving technologies (connected, autonomous, conventional) were evaluated via semantic differential (rating scale to identify connotative meaning of technologies). Second, participants rated perceived risk levels (for data, traffic environment, vehicle, and passenger) and perceived benefits and barriers of connected/autonomous driving. Since previous experience with automated functions of driver assistance systems can have an impact on the evaluation, three experience groups have been formed. The effect of experience on benefits and barrier perceptions was also analyzed. Risk perceptions were significantly smaller for conventional driving compared to connected/autonomous driving. With increasing experience, risk perception decreases for novel driving technologies with one exception: the perceived risk in handling data is not influenced by experience. The findings contribute to an understanding of risk perception in autonomous driving, which helps to foster a successful implementation of AVs on the market and to develop public information strategies.     

Cumulative Response to Sequences of Terror Attacks Varying in Frequency and Trajectory

There is a paucity of research examining public response to the cumulative effects of multiple related extreme events over time. We investigated the separate and combined effects of frequency and trajectory of terrorist attacks. A scenario simulation of a series of gas station bombings in Southern California was developed to evaluate respondents' affect, risk perception, and intended avoidance behavior using a 3 (frequency; low vs. medium vs. high) by 3 (trajectory; increasing vs. constant vs. decreasing) factorial design. For each of the nine conditions, three videos were created to simulate news broadcasts documenting the attacks over a three‐week period. A total of 275 respondents were included in the analysis. Results from analysis of covariances (ANCOVAs) indicate that trajectory of the sequential attacks (increasing or decreasing in frequency) predicts negative affect, risk perception, and avoidance behavior. In contrast, frequency predicts neither negative affect, positive affect, risk perception, nor intended avoidance behavior. Results from structural equation modeling (SEM) further indicate that the effect of negative affect on behavioral intention is mediated by risk perception and the effect of trajectory on risk perception is partially mediated by negative affect. In addition, both ANCOVAs and SEM model results suggest that (1) females experience less positive affect and perceive more risk than males, (2) respondents with higher income perceive more risk, and (3) younger respondents are more likely to modify their behavior to avoid the risk of future attacks.     

Direct Inference, Probability, and a Conceptual Gulf in Risk Communication

Differences in the conceptual frameworks of scientists and nonscientists may create barriers to risk communication. This article examines two such conceptual problems. First, the logic of "direct inference" from group statistics to probabilities about specific individuals suggests that individuals might be acting rationally in refusing to apply to themselves the conclusions of regulatory risk assessments. Second, while regulators and risk assessment scientists often use an "objectivist" or "relative frequency" interpretation of probability statements, members of the public are more likely to adopt a "subjectivist" or "degree of confidence" interpretation when estimating their personal risks, and either misunderstand or significantly discount the relevance of risk assessment conclusions. If these analyses of inference and probability are correct, there may be a conceptual gulf at the center of risk communication that cannot be bridged by additional data about the magnitude of group risk. Suggestions are made for empirical studies that might help regulators deal with this conceptual gulf.     

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.     

Insights into Flood Risk Misperceptions of Homeowners in the Dutch River Delta

Flooding is one of the most significant natural disasters worldwide. Nevertheless, voluntary take-up of individual damage reduction measures is low. A potential explanation is that flood risk perceptions of individual homeowners are below objective estimates of flood risk, which may imply that they underestimate the flood risk and the damage that can be avoided by damage reduction measures. The aim of this article is to assess possible flood risk misperceptions of floodplain residents in the Netherlands, and to offer insights into factors that are related with under- or overestimation of perceived flood risk. We analyzed survey data of 1,848 homeowners in the Dutch river delta and examine how perceptions of flood probability and damage relate to objective risk assessments, such as safety standards of dikes, as well as heuristics, including the availability heuristic and the affect heuristic. Results show that many Dutch floodplain inhabitants significantly overestimate the probability, but underestimate the maximum expected water level of a flood. We further observe that many respondents apply the availability heuristic.     

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.     

Explicating Experience: Development of a Valid Scale of Past Hazard Experience for Tornadoes

People's past experiences with a hazard theoretically influence how they approach future risks. Yet, past hazard experience has been conceptualized and measured in wide‐ranging, often simplistic, ways, resulting in mixed findings about its relationship with risk perception. This study develops a scale of past hazard experiences, in the context of tornadoes, that is content and construct valid. A conceptual definition was developed, a set of items were created to measure one's most memorable and multiple tornado experiences, and the measures were evaluated through two surveys of the public who reside in tornado‐prone areas. Four dimensions emerged of people's most memorable experience, reflecting their awareness of the tornado risk that day, their personalization of the risk, the intrusive impacts on them personally, and impacts experienced vicariously through others. Two dimensions emerged of people's multiple experiences, reflecting common types of communication received and negative emotional responses. These six dimensions are novel in that they capture people's experience across the timeline of a hazard as well as intangible experiences that are both direct and indirect. The six tornado experience dimensions were correlated with tornado risk perceptions measured as cognitive‐affective and as perceived probability of consequences. The varied experience–risk perception results suggest that it is important to understand the nuances of these concepts and their relationships. This study provides a foundation for future work to continue explicating past hazard experience, across different risk contexts, and for understanding its effect on risk assessment and responses.     

The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence

The Protective Action Decision Model (PADM) is a multistage model that is based on findings from research on people's responses to environmental hazards and disasters. The PADM integrates the processing of information derived from social and environmental cues with messages that social sources transmit through communication channels to those at risk. The PADM identifies three critical predecision processes (reception, attention, and comprehension of warnings or exposure, attention, and interpretation of environmental/social cues)—that precede all further processing. The revised model identifies three core perceptions—threat perceptions, protective action perceptions, and stakeholder perceptions—that form the basis for decisions about how to respond to an imminent or long‐term threat. The outcome of the protective action decision‐making process, together with situational facilitators and impediments, produces a behavioral response. In addition to describing the revised model and the research on which it is based, this article describes three applications (development of risk communication programs, evacuation modeling, and adoption of long‐term hazard adjustments) and identifies some of the research needed to address unresolved issues.     

The Dynamics of Evolving Beliefs,Concerns Emotions,and Behavioral Avoidance Following 9/11: A Longitudinal Analysis of Representative Archival Samples

September 11 created a natural experiment that enables us to track the psychological effects of a large‐scale terror event over time. The archival data came from 8,070 participants of 10 ABC and CBS News polls collected from September 2001 until September 2006. Six questions investigated emotional, behavioral, and cognitive responses to the events of September 11 over a five‐year period. We found that heightened responses after September 11 dissipated and reached a plateau at various points in time over a five‐year period. We also found that emotional, cognitive, and behavioral reactions were moderated by age, sex, political affiliation, and proximity to the attack. Both emotional and behavioral responses returned to a normal state after one year, whereas cognitively‐based perceptions of risk were still diminishing as late as September 2006. These results provide insight into how individuals will perceive and respond to future similar attacks.     

Psychological Determinants of Willingness to Taste and Purchase Genetically Modified Food

Decreasing acceptance of biotechnologies over time has been reported in Europe. Studies claim that attitudes are negative, even hostile, and that people are very worried about genetic engineering in food and medicine. However, such studies are mostly based on surveys and these have significant methodological problems, such as low response rates, which may indicate that only those with strong views respond, thus biasing the sample. Here an alternative method, involving "topic-blind" recruitment of participants and a behavioral measure (food tasting), was used. We show that in a topic-blind sample of 100 individuals, 93% willingly tasted and ate what they believed to be genetically modified (GM) food in an experimental setting, and 48% said they would buy GM food in the future, results that are surprising in the context of other reports about attitudes and intentions toward GM food. Purchasers and nonpurchasers differed in their attitudes toward GM food on key risk-related scales (particularly on a dread-not dread scale--a measure of integral affect--and an ethical-unethical scale). Despite these differences, however, and despite their negative attitude, most nonpurchasers (85.7%) still tasted the GM apple. Incidental affect (state stress and trait worry) was not found to influence risk-related judgments about GM food. Integral affect (dread of GM plants and animals used for food) and concerns about the future risks of GM animals in food were found to be key predictors of willingness to purchase GM food.     

Tornado Warning Perception and Response: Integrating the Roles of Visual Design,Demographics, and Hazard Experience

Recent advancements in severe weather detection and warning dissemination technologies have reduced, but not eliminated, large‐casualty tornado hazards in the United States. Research on warning cognition and behavioral response by the public has the potential to further reduce tornado‐related deaths and injuries; however, less research has been conducted in this area compared to tornado research in the physical sciences. Extant research in this vein tends to bifurcate. One branch of studies derives from classic risk perception, which investigates cognitive, affective, and sociocultural factors in relation to concern and preparation for uncertain risks. Another branch focuses on psychological, social, and cultural factors implicated in warning response for rapid onset hazards, with attention paid to previous experience and message design. Few studies link risk perceptions with cognition and response as elicited by specific examples of warnings. The present study unites risk perception, cognition, and response approaches by testing the contributions of hypothesized warning response drivers in one set of path models. Warning response is approximated by perceived fear and intended protective action as reported by survey respondents when exposed to hypothetical tornado warning scenarios. This study considers the roles of hazard knowledge acquisition, information‐seeking behaviors, previous experience, and sociodemographic factors while controlling for the effects of the visual warning graphic. Findings from the study indicate the primacy of a user's visual interpretation of a warning graphic in shaping tornado warning response. Results also suggest that information‐seeking habits, previous tornado experience, and local disaster culture play strong influencing roles in warning response.