Perplexing problems in risk communication of emergent public security events: A psychological perspective

Journal of Natural Disasters

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 25-30

  Liang, Zhe ^a,b   Xu, Jie Hong ^a,b   Li, Shu ^a   Sun, Yan ^a,b   Liu, Chang Jiang ^a,b   Ye, Xian Bao ^c  

^a INSTITUTE OF PSYCHOLOGY   (China)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHINESE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (China)

^c FUZHOU UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Emergent public security events; Framing effect; Psychological typhoon eye; Risk communication

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION; DECISION MAKING; DISASTER MANAGEMENT; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; PSYCHOLOGY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK PERCEPTION;

EID: 51249107105     PISSN: 10044574     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Chinese source.
2. Slovic P. Perception of risk[J]. Science, 1987, 236(4799): 280-285.
3. Covello V T, Peters R G, Wojtecki J G, et al. Risk communication, the West Nile virus epidemic, and bioterrorism: responding to the communication challenges posed by the intentional or unintentional release of a pathogen in an urban setting[J]. Journal of Urban Health, 2001, 78(2): 382-391.
4. Spencer J W, Se-litz R, Laska S, et al. The different influences of newspaper and television news reports of a natural hazard on response behavior[J]. Communication Research, 1992, 19(3): 299-325.
5. Griffin R J, Dunwoody S, Zabala F. Public reliance on risk communication channels in the wake of a Cyptosporidium outbreak[J]. Risk Analysis, 1998, 18(4): 367-375.
6. Chinese source.
7. Gigerenzer G, Hertwig R, Van B E, et al. "A 30% chance of rain tomorrow": How does the public understand probabilistic weather forecasts? [J]. Risk Analysis, 2005, 25 (3): 623-629.
8. Budescu D V, Wallsten T S. Processing linguistic probabilities: General principles and empirical evidence[J]. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 1995, 32: 275-318.
9. Moxey L M, Sanford A J. Communicating quantities: a review of psycholinguistic evidence of how expressions determine perspectives [J]. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2000, 14(3): 237-255.
10. Budescu D V, Weinberg S, Wallsten T S. Decisions based on numerically and verbally expressed uncertainties[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1988, 14(2): 281-294.
11. Wallsten T S, Budescu D V, Zwick R, et al. Preferences and reasons for communicating probabilistic information in verbal or numerical terms [J]. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1993, 31 (2): 135-138.
12. Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice[J]. Science, 1981, 211 (4481): 453-458.
13. Arrow K J. Risk perception in psychology and economics[J]. Economic Inquiry, 1982, 20(1): 1-9.
14. Kahneman D, Tversky A. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk[J]. Econometrica, 1979, 47(2): 263-292.
15. Li S. Can the conditions governing the framing effect be determined? [J]. Journal of Economic Psychology, 1998, 19: 133-153.
16. Chinese source.
17. Chinese source.
18. Tversky A, Sattath S, Slovic P. Contingent weighting in judgment and choice[J]. Psychological review, 1988, 95 (3): 371-384.
19. Li S. A behavioral choice model when computational ability matters[J]. Applied Intelligence, 2004, 20(2): 147-163.
20. Shafir E. Choosing versus rejecting: why some options are both better and worse than others[J]. Memory and Cognition, 1993, 21 (4): 546-556.
21. Li S, Fang Y. Respondents in Asian cultures (eg, Chinese) are more risk-seeking and more werconfident than respondents in other cultures (eg, in United States) but the reciprocal predictions are in total opposition: How and why? [J]. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 2004, 4(2): 263-292.
22. Guedeney C, Mendel G. L'angoisse atomique et les centrales nucléaires: contribution psychanalytique et sociopsychanalytique à l'étude d'un phénomène collectif[M]. Paris: Payot, 1973.
23. Chinese source.
24. Festinger L. A theory of cognitive dissonance[M]. Evanston, III.: Row, Peterson, 1957.
25. Lichtenstein S, Baruch F, Phillips L D. Calibration of probabilities: The state of the art to 1980 [M]. In: Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. UK: Cambridge University Press, 1982: 306-334.
26. Chinese source.
27. Forbes D P. Are some entrepreneurs more overconfident than others [J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2005, 20: 623-640.
28. Fox C R, Irwin J R. The Role of Context in the Communication of Uncertain Beliefs [J]. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1998, 20 (1): 57-70.
29. Mcguire W. The nature of attitudes and attitude change [J]. The handbook of social psychology, 1969, 3: 299-325.
30. Chinese source.