On interpretative risk perception research: Some reflections on its origins; its nature; and its possible applications in risk communication practice

Health, Risk and Society

Volumn 11, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 409-430

  Horlick Jones, Tom ^a   Prades, Ana ^b  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b CIEMAT   (Spain)

Author keywords

Interpretative risk perception research; Risk; Risk and practical reasoning; Risk communication; Risk perception; Thick description

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMMUNICATION SKILL; CULTURAL VALUE; DANGEROUS GOODS; HEALTH HAZARD; INDUSTRIAL AREA; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; SOCIAL INTERACTION; SPAIN; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 70350767357     PISSN: 13698575     EISSN: 14698331     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13698570903180448     Document Type: Article

References (92)

1. Alaszewski, A. and Horlick-Jones, T., 2002. Risk and health: Review of current research and identification of areas for further research. Report to Economic & Social Research Council and Medical Research Council. Canterbury and Cardiff: University of Kent and Cardiff University.
2. Beck, U., Giddens, A., and Lash, S., 1994. Reflexive modernisation: politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order. Cambridge: Polity.
3. Bellaby, P., 2003. Communication and miscommunication of risk: understanding UK patient's attitudes to combined MMR vaccination. British medical journal, 327, 725-728.
4. Bickerstaff, K. and Walker, G., 1999. Clearing the smog? Public responses to air-quality information. Local environment, 4 (3), 279-294.
5. Bickerstaff, K. and Walker, G., 2002. Risk, responsibility, and blame: an analysis of vocabularies of motive in air-pollution(ing) discourses. Environment and planning A, 34, 2175-2192.
6. Bittner, E., 1967. The police on skid-row: A study in peace keeping. American sociological review, 32, 699-715.
7. Bloor, M., 1995. The sociology of HIV transmission. London: Sage.
8. Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M., and Robson, K., 2001. Focus groups in social research. London: Sage.
9. Burchell, G., Gordon, C., and Miller, P., eds., 1991. The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10. Burgess, A., 2004. Cellular phones, public fears and a culture of precaution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Candlin, C. and Candlin, S., 2002. Discourse, expertise and the management of risk in healthcare settings. Research on language and social interaction, 35, 115-137.
12. De Marchi, B., 2000. Learning from citizens: A Venetian experience. Journal of hazardous materials, 78 (1-3), 247-259.
13. Douglas, M., 1990. Risk as a forensic resource. Daedalus, 119 (4), 1-16.
14. Douglas, M., 1992. Risk and blame: Essays in cultural theory. London: Routledge.
15. Dueňas, D. and Espluga, J., 2008. Social movements, local politics and governance of petrochemical risks. Paper delivered to the International Sociological Association Congress, Barcelona, 7 September.
16. Durodie, B., 2003. The true cost of precautionary chemical regulation. Risk analysis, 23 (2), 389-398.
17. Eiser, J.R., 2003. Public perception of risk: A review of theory and research. Part 1. Uncertainty and choice: Towards an integrative theory of risk perception and behaviour. Report to Foresight, Office of Science and Technology. Sheffield: Centre for Research in Social Attitudes.
18. Espluga, J., Gamero, N., Prades, A., Oltra, C., and Solá, R., 2008. Institutional dimensions underlying (lack of) public trust in information on technological risk. Paper delivered to the International Sociological Association Congress, Barcelona, 7th September.
19. Farré, J. and Gonzalo, J., 2008. A complete communicative turn in research into risk. Paper delivered to the International Sociological Association Congress, Barcelona, 7 September.
20. Fielding, N. and Fielding, J., 1986. Linking data. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
21. Fitchen, J., Heath, J., and Fessenden-Raden, J., 1987. Risk perception in community context: A case study. In: B. Johnson and V. Covello, eds. The social and cultural construction of risk. Dordrecht: Reidel, 31-54.
22. Furedi, F., 1997. Culture of fear: Risk-taking and the morality of low expectations. London: Cassell.
23. Garfinkel, H., 1963. A conception of, and experiments with, 'trust' as a condition of stable concerted actions. In: O.J. Harvey, ed. Motivation and social interaction. New York: Ronald Press, 187-238.
24. Garfinkel, H., 1967. Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
25. Garfinkel, H., 2002. Ethnomethodology's program: Working out Durkheim's aphorism, edited and introduced by A. Rawls. Lanham Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield.
26. Garfinkel, H., Lynch, M., and Livingston, E., 1981. The work of a discovering science construed with materials from the optically discovered pulsar. Philosophy of social science, 11, 131-158.
27. Geertz, C., 1973. The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
28. Gilbert, G.N. and Mulkay, M., 1984. Opening Pandora's Box: A sociological analysis of scientist's discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Glassner, B., 1999. The culture of fear: Why Americans are afraid of the wrong things. New York: Basic Books.
30. Granovetter, M., 1985. Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American journal of sociology, 91 (3), 481-510.
31. Hacking, I., 1999. The social construction of what? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32. Halpern, D., and Bates, C., with Beales, G., and Heathfield, A., 2004. Personal responsibility and changing behaviour: The state of knowledge and its implications for public policy. London: Prime Minister's Strategy Unit, Cabinet Office.
33. Heritage, J., 1984. Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity.
34. Horlick-Jones, T., 2003. Managing risk and contingency: Interaction and accounting behaviour. Health, risk & society, 5, 221-228.
35. Horlick-Jones, T., 2005a. Informal logics of risk: Contingency and modes of practical reasoning. Journal of risk research, 8 (3), 253-272.
36. Horlick-Jones, T., 2005b. On 'risk work': Professional discourse, accountability and everyday action. Health, risk & society, 7 (3), 293-307.
37. Horlick-Jones, T., 2007. On the signature of new technologies: sociality, materiality and practical reasoning. In: R. Flynn and P. Bellaby, eds. Risk and the public acceptance of new technologies. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 41-65.
38. Horlick-Jones, T., 2009. Findings a way between nihilism and romanticism: Some reflections on the practice and politics of the sociology of risk. Health, risk & society, 11 (2), 91-98,
39. Horlick-Jones, T. and De Marchi, B., eds., 1995. Scientific expertise in Europe. Science and public policy, 22 (3), 138-207.
40. Horlick-Jones, T., De Marchi, B., Prades Lopez, A., Pidgeon, N., Del Zotto, M., Diaz Hildago, M., Pellizzoni, L., Sime, J., and Ungaro, D., 1998. The social dynamics of environmental risk perception: A cross-cultural study. Final report of the PRISP Project, European Commission 4th Framework Research Programme, Contract ENV4-CT96- 0265. Guildford: University of Surrey.
41. Horlick-Jones, T., Sime, J., and Pidgeon, N., 2003. The social dynamics of environmental risk perception: Implications for risk communication research and practice. In: N. Pidgeon, P. Slovic, and R. Kasperson, eds. The social amplification of risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 262-285.
42. Horlick-Jones, T., Walls, J., and Kitzinger, J., 2007b. Bricolage in action: Learning about, making sense of, and discussing issues about genetically modified crops and food. Health, risk & society, 9 (1), 83-103.
43. Horlick-Jones, T., Walls, J., Rowe, G., Pidgeon, N., Poortinga, W., Murdock, G., and O'Riordan, T., 2007a. The GM debate: Risk, politics and public engagement. London: Routledge.
44. Huber, P., 1991. Galileo's revenge: Junk science in the courtroom. New York: Basic Books.
45. Irwin, A., Dale, A., and Smith, D., 1996. Science and hell's kitchen: the local understanding of hazard issues. In: A. Irwin and B. Wynne, eds. Misunderstanding science? The public reconstruction of science and technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 47-64.
46. Irwin, A., Simmons, P., and Walker, G., 1999. Faulty environments and risk reasoning: The local understanding of industrial hazards. Environment and planning A, 31, 1311-1326.
47. Irwin, A. and Wynne, B., eds., 1996. Misunderstanding science? The public reconstruction of science and technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
48. Jackson, T., 2005. Motivating sustainable consumption: A review of evidence on consumer behaviour and behavioural change. Guildford: University of Surrey.
49. Jaeger, C., Renn, O., Rosa, E., and Webler, T., 2001. Risk, uncertainty and rational action. London: Earthscan.
50. Kerr, A., Cunningham-Burley, S., and Amos, A., 1998. Drawing the line: an analysis of lay people's discussions about the new genetics. Public understanding of science, 7, 113- 133.
51. Kitzinger, J., 1994. The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of health & illness, 16, 103-121.
52. Krimsky, S. and Golding, D., eds., 1992. Social Theones of Risk. Westport: Praeger.
53. Le Grand, J., 1997. Knights, knaves or pawns? Human behaviour and social policy. Journal of social policy, 26 (2), 149-169.
54. Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers., Bridgeman, J., and Ferguson-Smith, M., 2000. The BSE Inquiry (the Phillips Inquiry). London: The Stationery Office.
55. Lupton, D., 1993. Risk as moral danger: The social and political functions of risk discourse in public health. International journal of health services, 23, 425-435.
56. Lupton, D. and Tulloch, J., 2002. Life would be pretty dull without risk: Voluntary risk-taking and its pleasures. Health, risk & society 4 (2), 113-124.
57. Lynch, M., 2002. From naturally occurring data to naturally organized ordinary activities: Comment on Speer. Discourse studies, 4 (4), 531-537.
58. Macgill, S., 1987. The politics of anxiety. London: Pion.
59. Marris, C., Langford, I., and O'Riordan, T., 1996. Integrating sociological and psychological approaches to public perceptions of environmental risk: Detailed results from a questionnaire study, CSERGE Working Paper GEC 96-07. Norwich: University of East Anglia.
60. Marris, C., Langford, I.H., and O'Riordan, T., 1998. A quantitative test of the cultural theory of risk perceptions: Comparisons with the psychometric paradigm. Risk analysis, 18 (5), 635-648.
61. Marris, C., Wynne, B., Simmons, P., and Weldon, S., 2001. Public perceptions of agricultural biotechnologies in Europe. Final report of the PABE research project, funded by the Commission of the European Communities, Contract number FAIR CF98-3844 (DB12- SSMI).
62. Maynard, D., 2003. Bad news, good news: Conversational order in everyday talk and clinical settings. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
63. Moffatt, S. and Pless-Mulloli, T., 2003. 'It wasn't the plague we expected'. Parents' perceptions of the health and environmental impact of opencast coal mining. Social science & medicine, 57, 437-451.
64. Molotch, H., 2003. Where stuff comes from: How toasters, toilets, cars, computers, and many other things come to be as they are. New York: Routledge.
65. Molotch, H., 2008. Thinking like a state meets thinking like a person: Some local variations. Paper delivered to the International Sociological Association Congress, Barcelona, 7 September.
66. Myers, G., 2007. Commonplaces in risk talk: Face threats and forms of interaction. Journal of risk research, 10 (3), 285-305.
67. Petts, J., Horlick-Jones, T., and Murdock, G., 2001. Social amplification of risk: The media and the public. Sudbury: HSE Books.
68. Pidgeon, N., Slovic, P., and Kasperson, R., eds., 2003. The social amplification of risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
69. Popkin, S., 1994. The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
70. Potter, J. and Wetherell, M., 1987. Discourse and social psychology London: Sage.
71. Prades López, A., Horlick-Jones, T., Oltra, C., and Solá, R., 2007. Social perception of large R&D programmes, report to European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA). Barcelona: CIEMAT.
72. Prades López, A., Horlick-Jones, T., Oltra, C., and Solá, R., 2008. Lay perceptions of nuclear fusion: Multiple modes of understanding. Science and public policy, 35 (2), 95-105.
73. Prades Lopez, A., Martinez Arias, R., and Diaz Hildago, M., 1998. Social risk perception: Recent findings in Spain. In: Proceedings of the society for risk analysis (Europe) 8th Annual Conference, 11-14 October, Paris. Fortenay-aux-Roses: Institut de Protection et de Sûreté Nucleaire, 65-76.
74. Prior, L., 2001. Rationing through risk assessment in clinical genetics: all categories have wheels. Sociology of health & illness, 23, 570-593.
75. Renn, O., 2008. Risk governance: Coping with uncertainty in a complex world. London: Earthscan.
76. Rose, N., 1999. Powers of freedom: Reframing political thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
77. Ryle, G., 1971. The thinking of thoughts: What is 'Le Penseur' doing? In: Collected Papers, Volume 2. London: Hutchinson, 480-496.
78. Schutz, A., 1962. Collected papers I: The problem of social reality (edited by M. Natanson). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
79. Silverman, D. and Gubrium, J., 1994. Competing strategies for analyzing the contexts of social interaction. Sociological inquiry, 64 (2), 179-198.
80. Sjöberg, L., 1997. Explaining risk perception: An empirical evaluation of cultural theory. Risk, decision and policy, 2, 113-130.
81. Slovic, P., 2000. The perception of risk. London: Earthscan.
82. Slovic, P. and Peters, E., 1998. The importance of worldviews in risk perception. Risk decision and policy, 3 (2), 165-170.
83. Stern, N., 2006. The Stern review report on the economics of climate change. http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk
84. Taylor-Gooby, P., 2008. Sociological approaches to risk: Strong in analysis but weak in policy influence in recent UK developments. Journal of risk research, 11 (7), 863- 876.
85. Timotojevic, L. and Barnett, J., 2006. Managing the possible health risks of mobile telecommunications: Public understandings of precautionary action and advice. Health, risk & society, 8 (2 , 143-164.
86. Walker, G., Simmons, P., Wynne, B., and Irwin, A., 1998. Public perception of risks associated with major accident hazards. Sudbury: HSE Books.
87. Walls, J., Pidgeon, N., Weyman, A., and Horlicks-Jones, T., 2004. Critical trust: Understanding lay perceptions of health and safety risk regulation. Health, risk & society, 6, 133-150.
88. Watson, R. and Coulter, J., eds., 2008. The debate over cognitivism. Theory, culture & society, 25 (2), 1-125.
89. White, S., 1999. Examining the artfulness of 'risk talk'. In: A. Jokinen, K. Juhila, and T. Pösö, eds. Constructing social work practice. Aldershot: Ashgate, 87-102.
90. WHO, 2006. Health, hazards and public debate: Lessons for risk communication from the BSE/CJD saga. Copenhagen: World Health Organization.
91. WHO, 2007. Risk perception and communication. Report of a WHO Expert Consultation Meeting. Copenhagen: World Health Organization.
92. Zonabend, F., 1993. The nuclear peninsula. Cambridge and Paris: Cambridge University Press and Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l'Homme.