Test of a trust and confidence model in the applied context of electromagnetic field (EMF) risks

Risk Analysis

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 705-716

  Siegrist, Michael ^a   Earle, Timothy C ^b   Gutscher, Heinz ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Confidence; Electromagnetic fields; Mobile phone; Risk perception; Social trust

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS; RISKS;

SOCIAL TRUST;

RISK MANAGEMENT;

ATTITUDINAL SURVEY; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD; RISK PERCEPTION;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COOPERATION; DECISION MAKING; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL ASPECT; SWITZERLAND; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; QUESTIONNAIRES; RISK FACTORS; RISK MANAGEMENT; SWEDEN; TRUST;

SWITZERLAND;

EID: 0041663925     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1539-6924.00349     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Baird, B. N. R. (1986). Tolerance for environmental health risks: The influence of knowledge, benefits, voluntariness, and environmental attitudes. Risk Analysis, 6, 425-435.
2. Bassett, G. W., Jenkins-Smith, H. C., & Silva, C. (1996). On-site storage of high level nuclear waste: Attitudes and perceptions of local residents. Risk Analysis, 16, 309-319.
3. Bentler, P. M. (1993). EQS: Structural Equations Program Manual. Los Angeles: BMDP Statistical Software.
4. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: Wiley.
5. Bord, R. J., & O'Connor, R. E. (1990). Risk communication, knowledge, and attitudes: Explaining reactions to a technology perceived as risky. Risk Analysis, 10, 499-506.
6. Bord, R. J., & O'Connor, R. E. (1992). Determinants of risk perceptions of a hazardous waste site. Risk Analysis, 12, 411-416.
7. Byrne, B. M. (1994). Structural Equation Modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
8. Cvetkovich, G. (1999). The attribution of social trust. In G. Cvetkovich & R. Löfstedt (Eds.), Social Trust and the Management of Risk (pp. 53-61). London: Earthscan.
9. Cvetkovich, G., & Löfstedt, R. (Eds.). (1999). Social Trust and the Management of Risk. London: Earthscan.
10. Cvetkovich, G., Siegrist, M., Murray, R., & Tragesser, S. (2002). New information and social trust: Asymmetry and perseverance of attributions about hazard managers. Risk Analysis, 22, 359-367.
11. De Bruin, E. N. M., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (1999a). The double meaning of a single act: Influences of the perceiver and the perceived on cooperative behaviour. European Journal of Personality, 13, 165-182.
12. De Bruin, E. N. M., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (1999b). Impression formation and cooperative behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 305-328.
13. De Bruin, E. N. M., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2000). What people look for in others: Influences of the perceiver and the perceived on information selection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 206-219.
14. Drottz-Sjöberg, B.-M., & Sjöberg, L. (1991). Adolescents' attitudes to nuclear power and radioactive wastes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 2007-2036.
15. Earle, T. C., & Cvetkovich, G. T. (1995). Social Trust: Toward a Cosmopolitan Society. Westport, CT: Praeger.
16. Earle, T. C., & Cvetkovich, G. (1997). Culture, cosmopolitanism, and risk management. Risk Analysis, 17, 55-65.
17. Earle, T. C., & Cvetkovich, G. (1999). Social trust and culture in risk management. In G. Cvetkovich & R. E. Löfstedt (Eds.), Social Trust and the Management of Risk (pp. 9-21). London: Earthscan.
18. Earle, T. C., Siegrist, M., & Gutscher, H. (2002). Trust and confidence: A dual-mode model of cooperation. Manuscript submitted for publication.
19. Figueiredo, C. J., & Drottz-Sjöberg, B.-M. (2000). Perceived control, voluntariness and emotional reactions in relocated areas of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. Risk: Health, Safety & Environment, 11, 233-242.
20. Finucane, M. L., Alhakami, A., Slovic, P., & Johnson, S. M. (2000). The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13, 1-17.
21. Flynn, J., Burns, W., Mertz, C. K., & Slovic, P. (1992). Trust as a determinant of opposition to a high-level radioactive waste repository: Analysis of a structural model. Risk Analysis, 12, 417-429.
22. Freudenburg, W. R. (1993). Risk and recreancy: Weber, the division of labor, and the rationality of risk perceptions. Social Forces, 71, 909-932.
23. Frewer, L. J., Howard, C., Hedderley, D., & Shepherd, R. (1996). What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs. Risk Analysis, 16, 473-486.
24. Glaeser, E. L., Laibson, D. I., Scheinkman, J. A., & Soutter, C. L. (2000). Measuring trust. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115, 811-846.
25. Grobe, D., Douthitt, R., & Zepeda, L. (1999). A model of consumers' risk perceptions toward Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rbGH): The impact of risk characteristics. Risk Analysis, 19, 661-673.
26. Groothuis, P. A., & Miller, G. (1997). The role of social distrust in risk-benefit analysis: A study of the siting of a hazardous waste disposal facility. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 15, 241-257.
27. Hays, C. L. (1999, June 27). Coca-Cola hopes things go better with "sorry." New York Times, p. 3, Section IV.
28. Hoyle, R. H., & Panter, A. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural Equation Modeling (pp. 158-176). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
29. Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural Equation Modeling (pp. 76-99). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
30. Hunt, S., Frewer, L. J., & Shepherd, R. (1999). Public trust in sources of information about radiation risks in the UK. Journal of Risk Research, 2, 167-180.
31. Jungermann, H., Pfister, H.-R., & Fischer, K. (1996). Credibility, information preferences, and information interests. Risk Analysis, 16, 251-261.
32. Kunreuther, H., Easterling, D., Desvousges, W., & Slovic, P. (1990). Public attitudes toward siting a high-level nuclear waste repository in Nevada. Risk Analysis, 10, 469-484.
33. Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 267-286.
34. Löfstedt, R. E., & Renn, O. (1997). The Brent Spar controversy: An example of risk communication gone wrong. Risk Analysis, 17, 131-136.
35. Luhmann, N. (1988). Familiarity, confidence, trust: Problems and alternatives. In D. Gambetta (Eds.), Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations (pp. 94-107). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
36. Luhmann, N. (1989). Vertrauen: Ein Mechanismus der Reduktion sozialer Komplexität. Stuttgart: Enke.
37. Metlay, D. (1999). Institutional trust and confidence: A journey into a conceptual quagmire. In G. Cvetkovich & R. Löfstedt (Eds.), Social Trust and the Management of Risk (pp. 100-116). London: Earthscan.
38. Nissenbaum, H. (2001). Securing trust online: Wisdom or oxymoron? Boston University Law Review, 81, 635-664.
39. Peters, E., & Slovic, P. (1996). The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 1427-1453.
40. Peters, R. G., Covello, V. T., & McCallum, D. B. (1997). The determinants of trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: An empirical study. Risk Analysis, 17, 43-54.
41. Pijawka, K. D., & Mushkatel, A. H. (1991/92). Public opposition to the siting of the high-level nuclear waste repository: The importance of trust. Policy Studies Review, 10(4), 180-194.
42. Plous, S. (1991). Biases in the assimilation to technological breakdowns: Do accidents make us safer? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1058-1082.
43. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. PS: Political Science and Politics, 28, 664-683.
44. Renn, O., & Levine, D. (1991). Credibility and trust in risk communication. In R. E. Kasperson & P. J. M. Stallen (Eds.), Communicating Risks to the Public (pp. 175-218). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
45. Ribstein, L. E. (2001). Law v. trust. Boston University Law Review, 81, 553-590.
46. Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of Personality, 35, 651-665.
47. Rotter, J. B. (1980). Interpersonal trust, trustworthiness, and gullibility. American Psychologist, 35, 1-7.
48. Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393-404.
49. Rundmo, T. (2002). Associations between affect and risk perception. Journal of Risk Research, 5, 119-135.
50. Seligman, A. B. (1998). Trust and sociability: On the limits of confidence and role expectations. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 57, 391-404.
51. Siegrist, M. (1999). A causal model explaining the perception and acceptance of gene technology. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 2093-2106.
52. Siegrist, M. (2000). The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis, 20, 195-203.
53. Siegrist, M., Cvetkovich, G., & Roth, C. (2000). Salient value similarity, social trust, and risk/benefit perception. Risk Analysis, 20, 353-362.
54. Siegrist, M., Earle, T. C., & Gutscher, H. (In press). Perception of risk: The influence of general trust, and general confidence. Journal of Risk Research.
55. Sjöberg, L. (2000). Perceived risk and tampering with nature. Journal of Risk Research, 3, 353-367.
56. Sjöberg, L. (2001). Limits of knowledge and the limited importance of trust. Risk Analysis, 21, 189-198.
57. Skowronski, J. J., & Carlston, D. E. (1989). Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of explanations. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 131-142.
58. Slovic, P. (1993). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 13, 675-682.
59. Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personaliy and Social Psychology Review, 4, 108-131.
60. Spies, S., Murdock, S. H., White, S., Krannich, R., Wulfhorst, J. D., Wrigley, K., Leistritz, F. L., Sell, R., & Thompson, J. (1998). Support for waste facility siting: Differences between community leaders and residents. Rural Sociology, 63, 65-93.
61. Summers, C., & Hine, D. W. (1997). Nuclear waste goes on the road: Risk perceptions and compensatory tradeoffs in single-industry communities. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 29, 210-222.
62. Taylor, S. E. (1991). Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: The mobilization-minimization hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 67-85.
63. Walker, G., Simmons, P., Irwin, A., & Wynne, B. (1999). Risk communication, public participation and the Seveso II directive. Journals of Hazardous Materials, 65, 179-190.
64. Walls, J., Pidgeon, N., Weyman, A., & Horlick Jones, T. (2002, July). Social trust in UK risk regulators: The role of practical reasoning strategies in the formation of public attitudes. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis Europe, Berlin, Germany.
65. Williams, B. L., Brown, S., Greenberg, M., & Kahn, M. A. (1999). Risk perception in context: The Savannah River site stake-holder study. Risk Analysis, 19, 1019-1035.
66. Yamagishi, T. (1988). The provision of a sanctioning system in the United States and Japan. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 265-271.
67. Yamagishi, T., & Cook, K. S. (1993). Generalized exchange and social dilemmas. Social Psychology Quarterly, 56, 235-248.
68. Yamagishi, T., & Yamagishi, M. (1994). Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan. Motivation and Emotion, 18, 129-166.