Rational risk perception: Utopia or dystopia?

Journal of Risk Research

Volumn 9, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 683-696

  Sjöberg, Lennart ^a  

^a STOCKHOLM SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Conflict; Consensus; Experts; Risk perception

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; HAZARDS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; SPENT FUELS;

ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE; HUMAN FOOD CHAIN; RISK MITIGATION;

RISK PERCEPTION;

EID: 33749329152     PISSN: 13669877     EISSN: 14664461     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13669870600799952     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. af Wåhlberg, A. and Sjöberg, L. (2000) Risk perception and the media, Journal of Risk Research, 3, pp. 31-50.
2. Douglas, M. and Wildavsky, A. (1982) Risk and culture (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).
3. Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S. and Combs, B. (1978) How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits, Policy Sciences, 9, pp. 127-152.
4. Löfstedt, R. (2001) Risk and regulation: Boat owners' perceptions of recent antifouling legislation, Risk Management: An International Journal, 3, pp. 33-46.
5. Milbrath, L. (1981) Citizen surveys as citizen participation, Applied Behavioral Science, 17, pp. 478-496.
6. Muller, F. M. (1892) Theosophy: Or Psychological Religion (New Delhi: Jetley for AES).
7. Nisbett, R. E. and Wilson, T. D. (1977) Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes, Psychological Review, 84, pp. 231-259.
8. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) (1975) The reactor safety study: An assessment of accidental risks on US commercial nuclear power plants (NUREG-74/104, WASH 1400) (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office).
9. Ramsberg, J. and Sjöberg, L. (1997) The cost-effectiveness of life saving interventions in Sweden, Risk Analysis, 17, pp. 467-478.
10. Siegrist, M. (1999) A causal model explaining the perception and acceptance of gene technology, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, pp. 2093-2106.
11. Siegrist, M. (2000) The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology, Risk Analysis, 20, pp. 195-204.
12. Siegrist, M., Cvetkovich, G. and Roth, C. (2000) Salient value similarity, social trust, and risk/benefit perception, Risk Analysis, 20, pp. 353-362.
13. Sjöberg, L. (1996) Risk Perceptions by Politicians and the Public (Rhizikon: Risk Research Reports 23) (Stockholm: Center for Risk Research).
14. Sjöberg, L. (1999) Consequences of perceived risk: Demand for mitigation, Journal of Risk Research, 2, pp. 129-149.
15. Sjöberg, L. (2000a) Consequences matter, "risk" is marginal, Journal of Risk Research, 3, pp. 287-295.
16. Sjöberg, L. (2000b) Factors in risk perception, Risk Analysis, 20, pp. 1-11.
17. Sjöberg, L. (2000c) Perceived risk and tampering with nature, Journal of Risk Research, 3, pp. 353-367.
18. Sjöberg, L. (2001a) Limits of knowledge and the limited importance of trust, Risk Analysis, 21, pp. 189-198.
19. Sjöberg, L. (2001b) Political decisions and public risk perception, Reliability Engineering and Systems Safety, 72, pp. 115-124.
20. Sjöberg, L. (2001c) Riskattityder och inställningen till djupförvar för använt kärnbränsle i fyra kommuner. ("Risk attitudes and the attitude to a depth repository for spent nuclear fuel in four municipalities) (Research Report R-01-54) (Stockholm: SKB).
21. Sjöberg, L. (2001d) Whose risk perception should influence decisions?, Reliability Engineering and Systems Safety, 72, pp. 149-152.
22. Sjöberg, L. (2002a) The allegedly simple structure of experts' risk perception: An urban legend in risk research, Science, Technology and Human Values, 27, pp. 443-459.
23. Sjöberg, L. (2002b) Attitudes to technology and risk: Going beyond what is immediately given, Policy Sciences, 35, pp. 379-400.
24. Sjöberg, L. (2002c) The distortion of beliefs in the face of uncertainty (SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2002:09) (Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics).
25. Sjöberg, L. (2003a) Attitudes and risk perceptions of stakeholders in a nuclear waste siting issue, Risk Analysis, 23, pp. 739-749.
26. Sjöberg, L. (2003b) Distal factors in risk perception, Journal of Risk Research, 6, pp. 187-212.
27. Sjöberg, L. (2004) Local acceptance of a high-level nuclear waste repository, Risk Analysis, 24, pp. 739-751.
28. Sjöberg, L. and af Wåhlberg, A. (2002) New Age and risk perception, Risk Analysis, 22, pp. 751-764.
29. Sjöberg, L., af Wåhlberg, A. and Kvist, P. (1998) The rise of risk: Risk related bills submitted to the Swedish parliament in 1964-65 and 1993-95, Journal of Risk Research, 1, pp. 191-195.
30. Sjöberg, L. and Drottz, B.-M. (1987) Psychological reactions to cancer risks after the Chernobyl accident, Medical Oncology and Tumor Pharmacotherapy, 4, pp. 259-271.
31. Sjöberg, L. and Fromm, J. (2001) Information technology risks as seen by the public, Risk Analysis, 21, pp. 427-442.
32. Sjöberg, L., Kolarova, D., Rucai, A.-A. and Bernström, M.-L. (2000) Risk perception in Bulgaria and Romania, in: O. Renn & B. Rohrmann (Eds) Cross-cultural risk perception. A Survey of Empirical Studies, pp. 145-184 (Dordrecht: Kluwer).
33. Slovic, P., Flynn, J. H. and Layman, M. (1991) Perceived risk, trust, and the politics of nuclear waste, Science, 254, pp. 1603-1607.
34. SOU (1979) Säker kärnkraft? Betänkande av Reaktorsäkerhetsutredningen. Stocholm: Statens offentliga utredningar 1979: 86.
35. Starr, C. (1969) Social benefit versus technological risk, Science, 165, pp. 1232-1238.
36. Tengs, O. T., Adams, M. E., Pliskin, J. S., Safran, D. G., Siegel, J. E., Weinstein, M. C. and Graham, J. D. (1995) Five-hundred life saving interventions and their cost effectiveness, Risk Analysis, 15, pp. 369-390.
37. Thornton, B. S. (1999) Plagues of the Mind. The New Epidemic of False Knowledge (Wilmington, DE: ISI Books).