Risk assessment, risk values and the social science programme: Why we do need risk perception research

Reliability Engineering and System Safety

Volumn 59, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 5-15

  Pidgeon, Nick ^a  

^a BANGOR UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; PUBLIC POLICY; REGULATORY COMPLIANCE; RISK MANAGEMENT; RISK PERCEPTION; SOCIAL SCIENCES;

RISK VALUES;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 0031599230     PISSN: 09518320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00114-2     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S.L. & Keeney, R., Acceptable Risk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1981.
2. National Research Council, Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society, ed. P.C. Stern and V. Fineberg. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1996.
3. Pidgeon, N.F., Hood, C., Jones, D. & Turner, B.A., Risk perception. In Risk: Analysis, Perception and Management. The Royal Society, London, 1992, pp. 89-134.
4. Pidgeon, N.F. & Beattie, J., The psychology of risk and uncertainty. In Handbook of Environmental Risk Assessment and Management, ed. P. Calow. Blackwell Science, Oxford, 1997, pp. 289-318.
5. Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. & Lichtenstein, S., Facts and fears: understanding perceived risk. In Societal Risk Assessment, ed. R. Schwing and W.A. Albers. Plenum, New York, 1980, pp. 181-124.
6. Vlek, C.J.H. & Stallen, P.J.M. Judging risks and benefits in the small and in the large. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1981, 28, 235-271.
7. Rohrmann, B., Risk Perception Research: Review and Documentation (Programme group men, environment, technology: studies on risk communication. Vol. 48). KFA Research Centre, Jülich, Germany, 1995.
8. Gardner, G.T. & Gould, L.C. Public perceptions of the risks and benefits of technology. Risk Analysis. 1989, 9, 225-242.
9. Fischhoff, B. Psychology and public policy: tool or toolmaker? American Psychologist, 1990, 45, 647-653.
10. Johnson, B.B. & Covello, V.T. (eds.), The Social and Cultural Construction of Risk. Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1987.
11. Earle, T.C. & Cvetkovich, G., Social Trust: Towards a Cosmopolitan Society. Greenwood Press, New York, 1995.
12. van der Pligt, J., van der Linden, J. & Ester, P. Attitudes to nuclear energy: beliefs, values and false consensus. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1982, 2, 221-231.
13. Cotgrove, S., Catastrophe or Cornucopia: The Environment, Politics and the Future. Wiley, Chichester, 1982.
14. Douglas, M. & Wildavsky, A., Risk and Culture: An Analysis of the Selection of Technological Dangers. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1982.
15. Dake, K. Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk: an analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1991, 22, 61-82.
16. Peters, E. & Slovic, P. The role of affect and worldview as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1996, 26(16), 1427-1453.
17. Vaughan, D., The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture and Deviance at NASA. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1996.
18. Turner, B.A. & Pidgeon, N.F., Man-made Disasters, 2nd edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 1997.
19. Barke, R., Jenkins-Smith, H. & Slovic, P., Risk perceptions of men and women scientists. Unpublished manuscript, School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1995.
20. Sjöberg, L. & Sjöberg, B.M. Knowledge and risk perception among nuclear power plant employees. Risk Analysis, 1991, 11, 607-618.
21. Vaughan, E. The significance of socio-economic and ethnic diversity for the risk communication process. Risk Analysis, 1995, 15, 169-180.
22. Sjöberg, L., Explaining risk perception: an empirical and quantitative evaluation of cultural theory. Report No. 22, Center for Risk Research, Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden, 1995.
23. Marris, C., Langford, I. & O'Riordan, T., Integrating sociological and psychological approaches to public perceptions of environmental risks: detailed results from a questionnaire study. CSERGE Working Paper GEC 96-07, Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment, University of East Anglia, Norwich, 1996.
24. Greenberg, M.R. & Schneider, D.F. Gender differences in risk perception: effects differ in stressed vs. non-stressed environments. Risk Analysis, 1995, 15, 503-511.
25. Bohnenblust & Slovic, Integrating technical analysis and public values in risk based decision making. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 1998, 59, 151-159.
26. Jones-Lee, M.W. & Loomes, G. Scale and context effects in the valuation of transport safety. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1995, 11, 183-203.
27. Beattie, J., Chilton, S., Cookson, R., Covey, J., Hopkins, L., Jones-Lee, M., Loomes, G., Pidgeon, N.F., Robinson, A. and Spencer, A., Valuing Health and Safety Controls: A Literature Review. HSE Books, London, 1997.
28. Tengs, T.O., Adams, M.E., Pliskin, J.S., Safran, D.G., Siegel, J.E., Weinstein, M.C. & Graham, J.D. Five-hundred lifesaving interventions and their cost effectiveness. Risk Analysis, 1995, 15, 369-390.
29. Interdepartmental Group on Risk Assessment, The Use of Risk Assessment within Government Departments. HSE, London, 1996.
30. HM Treasury, The Setting of Safety Standards: A Report by an Interdepartmental Group and External Advisors. London, 1996.
31. Layfield, F., Sizewell B Public Inquiry: Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations. HMSO, London, 1987.
32. Health and Safety Executive, The Tolerability of Risk From Nuclear Power Stations, 2nd edn. HMSO, London, 1992.
33. Rimmington, J. Risks and the regulator: puzzles and predicaments. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, 1995, 73(B), 173-181.
34. Vlek, C.A.J. A multi-level, multi-stage and multi-attribute perspective on risk assessment, decision making and risk control. Risk, Decision & Policy, 1996, 1, 9-32.
35. Health and Safety Executive, Generic Terms and Concepts in the Assessment and Regulation of Industrial Risks: Discussion Document. HSE, London, 1995.
36. Vrijling et al. Acceptable risk as a basis for design. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 1998, 59, 141-150.
37. Jasanoff, S. Bridging the two cultures of risk analysis. Risk Analysis, 1993, 13, 123-129.
38. Fischhoff, B., Watson, S. & Hope, C. Defining risk. Policy Sciences, 1984, 17, 123-139.
39. Baron, J., Morality and Rational Choice. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1993.
40. Slovic, P. The risk game. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 1998, 59, 73-77.
41. Pidgeon, N.F., Technocracy, democracy, secrecy and error. In Accident and Design, ed. C. Hood and D.K.C. Jones. University College London Press, London, 1996, pp. 161-171.
42. Margolis, H., Dealing with Risk: Why the Public and the Experts Disagree on Environmental Issues. University of Chicago Press, 1996.
43. Fiorino, D.J. Citizen participation and environmental risk: a survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology and Human Values, 1990, 15, 226-243.
44. Bostrom, A., Atman, C.J., Fischhoff, B. & Morgan, G.M. Evaluating risk communications: completing and correcting mental models of hazardous processes, Part II. Risk Analysis, 1994, 14, 789-798.
45. Renn, O., Webler, T., Rakel, H., Dienel, P. & Johnson, B. Public participation in decision making: a three step procedure. Policy Sciences, 1993, 26, 189-214.
46. Webler, T., 'Right' discourse in citizen participation. In Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse, ed. O. Renn, T. Webler and P. Wiedemann. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1995, pp. 35-86.
47. Sabini, J., Social Psychology, 2nd edn. Norton, London, 1995.
48. Irwin, J.R., Jones, L.E. & Mundo, D. Risk perception and victim perception: the judgement of HIV cases. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 1996, 9, 1-22.
49. Hodgkinson, G., Points or vectors? A comment on Irwin et al.'s 'Risk perception and victim perception: the judgement of HIV cases'. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making (in press).
50. Hunnius, G. & Kliemt, J., Risk as a social construction: the perception and communication of risk in the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic - a comparison between systems. In Risk is a Construct, ed. Bayerische Rück. Knesebeck, Munich, 1993, pp. 221-236.
51. Pidgeon, N.F., Blockley, D.I. & Turner, B.A. Site investigations: lessons from a late discovery of hazardous waste. The Structural Engineer, 1988, 66, 311-315.
52. Otway, H.J. & Thomas, K. Reflections on risk perception and policy. Risk Analysis, 1982, 2, 69-82.
53. Henwood, K.L. & Pidgeon, N.F. Qualitative research and psychological theorizing. British Journal of Psychology, 1992, 83, 97-111.
54. von Winterfeldt, D. & Edwards, W. Patterns of conflict about risky technologies. Risk Analysis, 1984, 4, 55-68.
55. Gregory, R., Lichtenstein, S. & Slovic, P. Valuing environmental resources: a constructive approach. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1993, 7, 177-197.
56. Pilisuk, M., Parks, S. & Hawkes, G. Public perception of technological risk. The Social Science Journal, 1987, 24, 403-413.
57. Hadden, S., A Citizen's Right to Know: Risk Communication and Public Policy. Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1989.
58. Rayner, S. & Cantor, R. How fair is safe enough? The cultural approach to social technology choice. Risk Analysis, 1987, 7, 3-9.
59. US National Research Council, Improving Risk Communication: National Research Council Committee. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1989.
60. Slovic, P. Perceived risk, trust and democracy. Risk Analysis, 1993, 13, 675-682.
61. Savage, I. An empirical investigation into the effect of psychological perceptions on the willingness-to-pay to reduce risk. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1993, 6, 75-90.
62. McDaniels, T.L., Kamlet, M.S. & Fischer, G.W. Risk perception and the value of safety. Risk Analysis, 1992, 12, 495-503.
63. Jones-Lee, M. & Loomes, G. Scale and context effects in the valuation of transport safety. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1995, 11, 183-203.
64. Fischhoff, B. Value elicitation: is there anything in there?. American Psychologist, 1991, 46, 835-847.
65. Cross, R. Facts and values in risk assessment. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 1998, 59, 27-40.
66. Cookson, R., Does the value of life depend upon the hazard context? Unpublished manuscript, Department of Economics, University of York, 1997.
67. Bullard, R.D., Dumping in Dixie: Race, Class and Environmental Quality. Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1990.
68. Zimmerman, R. Social equity and environmental risk. Risk Analysis, 1993, 13, 649-666.
69. Okrent, D. Risk perception and risk management: on knowledge, resource allocation and equity. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 1998, 59, 17-25.
70. Kasperson, R.E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H.S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J.X. & Ratrick, S. The social amplification of risk: a conceptual framework. Risk Analysis, 1988, 8, 177-187.
71. Kasperson, R.E., The social amplification of risk: progress in developing an integrative framework. In Social Theories of Risk, ed. S. Krimsky and D. Golding. Praeger, Westport, CT, 1992, pp. 153-178.
72. Pidgeon, N.F., Risk Communication and the Social Amplification of Risk. Health & Safety Executive, London, 1997.
73. Löfstedt, R. & Renn, O. The Brent Spar controversy; an example of risk communication gone wrong. Risk Analysis, 1997, 17, 131-136.
74. Behrens, E.G. The Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire of 1911: a lesson in legislative manipulation. Texas Law Review, 1983, 62, 361-387.
75. Watson, S.R. On risks and acceptability. Journal of the Society for Radiological Protection, 1981, 1, 21-25.
76. Fischhoff, B., Risk: a guide to controversy. Appendix C in Improving Risk Communication: National Research Council Committee. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1989, pp. 211-319.
77. Henrion, M. & Fischhoff, B. Assessing uncertainty in physical constants. American Journal of Physics, 1986, 54, 791-798.
78. Janis, I.L., Victims of Groupthink, 2nd edn. Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, 1982.
79. International Safety Advisory Group, Safety Culture: A Report by the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group (Safety Series No. 75-INSAG-4). International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 1991.
80. Pidgeon, N.F. The limits to safety? Culture, politics, learning and manmade disasters. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 1997, 5(1), 1-14.
81. Pidgeon, N.F. Risk assessment and accident analysis. Acta Psychologica, 1988, 68, 355-368.
82. Wynne, B., Frameworks of rationality in risk management: towards the testing of naive sociology. In Environmental Threats: Perception, Analysis and Management, ed. J. Brown. Bellhaven, London, 1989, pp. 33-45.
83. Funtowicz, S.O. & Ravetz, J.R., Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post-normal science. In Social Theories of Risk, ed. S. Krimsky and D. Golding. Praeger, Westport, CT, 1992, pp. 251-274.
84. Burke, D.C., The regulatory process and risk: a practitioner's view. Paper presented at the discussion meeting on Science, Policy and Risk, 18 March 1997. Royal Society, London, 1997.