Gender Differences in Risk Perception: Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives

A substantial body of risk research indicates that women and men differ in their perceptions of risk. This paper discusses how they differ and why. A review of a number of existing empirical studies of risk perception points at several problems, regarding what gender differences are found in such studies, and how these differences are accounted for. Firstly, quantitative approaches, which have so far dominated risk research, and qualitative approaches give different, sometimes even contradictory images of women's and men's perceptions of risk. Secondly, the gender differences that appear are often left unexplained, and even when explanations are suggested, these are seldom related to gender research and gender theory in any systematic way. This paper argues that a coherent, theoretically informed gender perspective on risk is needed to improve the understanding of women's and men's risk perceptions. An analysis of social theories of gender points out some relations and distinctions which should be considered in such a perspective. It is argued that gender structures, reflected in gendered ideology and gendered practice, give rise to systematic gender differences in the perception of risk. These gender differences may be of different kinds, and their investigation requires the use of qualitative as well as quantitative methods. In conclusion, the arguments about gender and risk perception are brought together in a theoretical model which might serve as a starting point for further research.     

Gender Differences in Risk Perception: Effects Differ in Stressed vs. Non-Stressed Environments

Contrary to previous reports that women are more concerned about environmental risks than men, we hypothesized that men and women residing in neighborhoods stressed by multiple hazards would demonstrate similar concerns about local environmental conditions. Analysis of a national data base and an aggregate of ten local data bases found greater female than male concern about local technological, behavioral, and land use hazards in good neighborhoods, but, as expected, not in stressed ones. We urge analysts to conduct more studies in stressed neighborhoods in order to better understand the perspective of those who live with environmental risks.     

Variability in Cross‐Domain Risk Perception among Smallholder Farmers in Mali by Gender and Other Demographic and Attitudinal Characteristics

Previous research has shown that men and women, on average, have different risk attitudes and may therefore see different value propositions in response to new opportunities. We use data from smallholder farm households in Mali to test whether risk perceptions differ by gender and across domains. We model this potential association across six risks (work injury, extreme weather, community relationships, debt, lack of buyers, and conflict) while controlling for demographic and attitudinal characteristics. Factor analysis highlights extreme weather and conflict as eliciting the most distinct patterns of participant response. Regression analysis for Mali as a whole reveals an association between gender and risk perception, with women expressing more concern except in the extreme weather domain; however, the association with gender is largely absent when models control for geographic region. We also find lower risk perception associated with an individualistic and/or fatalistic worldview, a risk‐tolerant outlook, and optimism about the future, while education, better health, a social orientation, self‐efficacy, and access to information are generally associated with more frequent worry—with some inconsistency. Income, wealth, and time poverty exhibit complex associations with perception of risk. Understanding whether and how men's and women's risk preferences differ, and identifying other dominant predictors such as geographic region and worldview, could help development organizations to shape risk mitigation interventions to increase the likelihood of adoption, and to avoid inadvertently making certain subpopulations worse off by increasing the potential for negative outcomes.     

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.     

Risk Perception and Movies: A Study of Availability as a Factor in Risk Perception

Media effects on risk perception have often been explained by Tversky and Kahneman's availability principle, but research has not consistently supported it. What seem like media effects based on availability may be effects of new information. In an experimental study, entertainment movies depicting dramatic risk events were shown. They were found to produce no average effects on perceived risks in spite of large mood effects and being perceived as credible. We found, however, evidence of idiosyncratic effects of the movies, that is, people reacted immediately after the movies with enhanced  or  diminished risk beliefs. These reactions had faded after 10 days. Implications for the availability heuristic and risk perception are discussed.     

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.     

Presenting Uncertainty in Health Risk Assessment: Initial Studies of Its Effects on Risk Perception and Trust

Some analysts suggest that discussing uncertainties in health risk assessments might reduce citizens'perceptions of risk and increase their respect for the risk-assessing agency. We tested this assumption with simulated news stories varying simple displays of uncertainty (e.g., a range of risk estimates, with and without graphics). Subjects from Eugene, Oregon, read one story each, and then answered a questionnaire. Three studies tested between 180 and 272 subjects each. Two focus groups obtained more detailed responses to these stories. The results suggested that (1) people are unfamiliar with uncertainty in risk assessments and in science; (2) people may recognize uncertainty when it is presented simply; (3) graphics may help people recognize uncertainty; (4) reactions to the environmental problems in the stories seemed affected less by presentation of uncertainty than by general risk attitudes and perceptions; (5) agency discussion of uncertainty in risk estimates may signal agency honesty and agency incompetence for some people; and (6) people seem to see lower risk estimates (10^-6, as opposed to 10^-3) as less credible. These findings, if confirmed, would have important implications for risk communication.     

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

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

Understanding the Relationship Between Direct Experience and Risk Perception of Natural Hazards

Risk perception has been largely examined in studies that have aimed to explain and predict preparedness behavior in the context of natural hazards. Findings from studies on the relationship between previous experience, preparedness, and risk perception in disaster situations have been inconsistent. Hence, the main goal of this work was to explore the influence of physical and emotional experience on risk perception regarding natural hazards. This study was conducted in a statistically representative sample of the city of Iquique, in northern Chile (n = 701), who completed a survey one month after the occurrence of an earthquake and tsunami (8.2 Mw). The survey assessed the experience and preparation actions of survivors in relation to this event. Using a structural equation model, we examined nine proposed relationships, six of which were significant. The final model had an adequate fit (χ² = 752.23, df = 283, comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.90, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.049). Direct experience showed the greatest influence on risk perception: while direct physical experience (i.e., the physical and material consequences associated with the earthquake) maintained a direct positive effect on risk perception, direct emotional experience (i.e., the fear of experiencing an earthquake) produced an indirect positive effect (through worry). Emotional experience, however, did not directly influence current preparedness and risk perception. Implications for understanding the relationship between risk perception and direct experience are discussed.     

How Do Disaster Characteristics Influence Risk Perception?

The main purpose of this study is to examine how risk perception is influenced by the type of disaster (flood or landslide) and victim characteristics. The data reported here are based on the National Risk Perception Survey (NRPS) that was administered for the victims and the general public in Taiwan in 2004. In that year, many towns in Taiwan were seriously affected by floods and landslides, resulting in huge economic losses and fatalities. The primary findings are: (1) the victims and the general public are concerned about the different potential hazards that might affect their residential area, (2) the negative associations between the sense of controllability and the perceived impact is high for landslide victims, but not for flood victims, and (3) disaster type, gender, and previously experienced disasters are good predictors of victims' attitudes toward natural disasters.     

Risk Perception and Risk Talk: The Case of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Radiation Risk

Individuals’ perceptions and their interpersonal communication about a risk event, or risk talk, can play a significant role in the formation of societal responses to the risk event. As they formulate their risk opinions and speak to others, risk information can circulate through their social networks and contribute to the construction of their risk information environment. In the present study, Japanese citizens’ risk perception and risk talk were examined in the context of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear radiation risk. We hypothesized and found that the risk information environment and risk literacy (i.e., competencies to understand and use risk information) interact to influence their risk perception and risk talk. In particular, risk literacy tends to stabilize people's risk perceptions and their risk communications. Nevertheless, there were some subtle differences between risk perception and communication, suggesting the importance of further examination of interpersonal risk communication and its role in the societal responses to risk events.     

Risk Perception and Personality Facets

The present study examined the relationship between personality facets and risk perception using the Big Five model. A broad range of hazards was considered: energy production, pollutants, sex, deviance, addictions, weapons, common individual hazards, outdoor activities, medical care, and psychotropic drugs. Key personality facets that were most predictive of risk perception compared to (or in association with) age, gender, educational level, and personality factors were identified. They were moderation and tranquility (associated with energy production or pollutants), rationality and efficiency (associated with pollutants, sex, deviance, addictions, or weapons), creativity, imagination, and reflection (associated with energy production, pollutants, or common individual hazards), self-disclosure (associated with outdoor activities), and nurturance and tenderness (associated with sex, deviance, addictions, or medical care). These facets may be recommended for use in future studies on risk perception.     

Aviation Risk Perception: A Comparison Between Experts and Novices

This article describes an exploratory investigation of the risk perceptions of experts and novices in relation to helicopter operations, under conditions where the participants are matched on various characteristics previously found to affect perceptions, such as demographic, gender, and background factors. The study reports considerable evidence of perceptual differences between the two participant groups (i.e., expert pilots and candidate pilots). We find that the experts' perceptions of relative risks are more veridical, in terms of their higher correlation with the true relative frequencies. A significant positive correlation between the flight hours and the contextual risk-taking tendency is also shown, leading the experienced pilots' choices toward risky alternatives in scenarios--a potential result of their overconfidence based on superior task performance. Possible explanations are offered for the findings and potential avenues for future research are identified.     

Characterizing Perception of Ecological Risk

Relatively little attention has been paid to the role of human perception and judgment in ecological risk management. This paper attempts to characterize perceived ecological risk, using the psychometric paradigm developed in the domain of human health risk perception. The research began by eliciting a set of scale characteristics and risk items (e.g., technologies, actions, events, beliefs) from focus group participants. Participants in the main study were 68 university students who completed a survey instrument that elicited ratings for each of 65 items on 30 characteristic scales and one scale regarding general risk to natural environments. The results are presented in terms of mean responses over individuals for each scale and item combination. Factor analyses show that five factors characterize the judgment data. These have been termed: impact on species, human benefits, impact on humans, avoidability, and knowledge of impacts. The factor results correspond with initial expectations and provide a plausible characterization of judgments regarding ecological risk. Some comparisons of mean responses for selected individual items are also presented.     

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.     

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.     

Risk Target: An Interactive Context Factor in Risk Perception

The effect of specification of the target on risk evaluation was examined. A whole set of hazards, covering most of the domains, were considered: common individual hazards, outdoor activities, medical care, public transportation, energy production, pollutants, sex, deviance, and addictions. Three human targets were introduced: personal health risk (including personal risk of death), health risk for people in the country, and health risk for people in the world. The basic design was a between-subjects design. The first hypothesis was that risk judgments made in the "world" condition should be higher than risk judgments made in the "country" condition, and risk judgments made in this condition should be higher than risk judgments made in the "personal" condition. This is what was observed. The second hypothesis was that the target effect should differ as a function of the kind of hazards considered. This also is what was observed. In two domains--pollutants, and deviance, sex, and addictions--the target effect was important. It corresponded to about one-tenth of the response scale. In the four remaining domains, the target effect was unimportant or absent.     

Contemporary Terrorism: Risk Perception in the London Options Market

Previous studies have a demonstrated a linkage between terrorist attacks and the operation of financial markets. This article focuses on terrorist events carried out over the last five years and examines how they have been perceived among participants on the London financial market. Data from the London options market suggest a high degree of sensitivity to these events. We argue that this sensitivity reveals a vulnerability in the financial markets should the recent trends in terrorist activity continue.     

Nanotechnology Risk Communication Past and Prologue

Nanotechnologies operate at atomic, molecular, and macromolecular scales, at scales where matter behaves differently than at larger scales and quantum effects can dominate. Nanotechnologies have captured the imagination of science fiction writers as science, engineering, and industry have leapt to the challenge of harnessing them. Applications are proliferating. In contrast, despite recent progress the regulatory landscape is not yet coherent, and public awareness of nanotechnology remains low. This has led risk researchers and critics of current nanotechnology risk communication efforts to call for proactive strategies that do more than address facts, that include and go beyond the public participation stipulated by some government acts. A redoubling of nanotechnology risk communication efforts could enable consumer choice and informed public discourse about regulation and public investments in science and safety.     

Risk Perception and Communication Unplugged: Twenty Years of Process1

Over the past twenty years, risk communication researchers and practitioners have learned some lessons, often at considerable personal price. For the most part, the mistakes that they have made have been natural, even intelligent ones. As a result, the same pitfalls may tempt newcomers to the field. This essay offers a personal (even confessional) history of the field over this period. It identifies a series of developmental stages. Progress through the stages involves consolidating the skills needed to execute it and learning its limitations. Knowing about their existence might speed the learning process and alert one to how much there still is to learn.