Understanding risk perception from natural hazards: Examples from Germany

RISK21 - Coping with Risks Due to Natural Hazards in the 21st Century - Proceedings of the RISK21 Workshop

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 101-108

  Plapp, T ^a   Werner, U ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KARLSRUHE   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AFFECTED AREA; GERMANY; INFLUENCING FACTOR; NATURAL HAZARD; PERSONAL RISKS; PREVENTIVE MEASURES; RESEARCH DESIGNS; RISK CHARACTERISTICS; RISK COMMUNICATION;

EARTHQUAKES; HAZARDS;

RISK PERCEPTION;

EID: 77955339126     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. Barke, R.P., Jenkins-Smith, H. & Slovic, P. 1997: Risk perceptions of men and women scientists. Social Science Quarterly 78: 167-176.
2. Brun, W. 1992: Cognitive components in risk perception: natural versus manmade risks. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 5: 117-132.
3. Dake, K. 1991: Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk. An analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 22: 61-82.
4. Dake, K. 1992: Myths of nature: culture and the social construction of risk. Journal of Social Issues 48: 21-37.
5. Douglas, M. 1985: Risk acceptability according to the social sciences. Londong: Routgledge & Kegan Paul.
6. Douglas, M. & Wildavsky, A. 1983: Risk and culture. Berkeley et al.: University of California Press.
7. Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S. & Combs, B. 1978: How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits, Policy Sciences 8: 127-152.
8. Geipel, R., Härta, R. & Pohl, J. 1997: Risiken im Mittelrheinischen Becken. Bericht über ein von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft gefördertes Projekt. Deutsche IDNDR-Reihe 14, Deutsches IDNDRKomitee für Katastrophenvorbeugung. Bonn. (Available in German only)
9. Greenberg, M.R. & Schneider, D.F. 1995: Gender differences in risk perception: effects differ in stressed vs. non-stressed environments. Risk Analysis Vol. 15: 503-511.
10. Gustafson, P.E. 1998: Gender differences in risk perception: theoretical and methodological perspectives. Risk Analysis 18: 805-811.
11. Karger, C.R. & Wiedemann, P.M. 1998: Kognitive und affektive Komponenten der Bewertung von Umweltrisiken. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie 45: 334-344. (Available in German only)
12. Lave, T.R. & Lave, L. B. 1991: Public perception of the risks of floods: implications for communication. Risk Analysis 11: 255-267.
13. Lindell, M.K. 1994: perceived characteristics of environmental hazards. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 12: 303-326.
14. Lindell, M.K. & Perry, R.W. 2000: Household adjustment to earthquake hazard. A review of research. Environment and Behavior 32: 461-501.
15. Luhmann, N. 1991: Soziologie des Risikos. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. (English Title: Risk: a sociological theory)
16. Münchener Rück, 1999: Naturkatastrophen in Deutschland. Schadenerfahrungen und Schadenpotentiale. München. (Available in German only)
17. 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.
18. Plapp, T. 2004a: Wahrnehmung von Risiken aus Naturkatastrophen. Eine empirische Untersuchung in sechs gefährdeten Gebieten Süd- und Westdeutschlands. Karlsruhe: Verlag für Versicherungswirtschaft. (Available in German only)
19. Plapp, T. 2004b: Local experience of disaster management and flood risk perception. In D. Malzahn & T. Plapp (eds), Disasters and Society - From Hazard Assessment to Risk Reduction; Proc. Intern. Conf., Karlsruhe 26-27 July 2004: 391-398. Berlin: Logos Verlag
20. Renn, O. 1995: Individual and social perception of risk. In: U. Fuhrer (ed.), Ökologisches Handeln als sozialer Prozess: 27-50. Basel: Birkhäuser.
21. Rohrmann, B. 1999: Risk perception research. Review and documentation, revised edition. RC Studies #69 Programme Group Man, Environment, Technology; Research Center Juelich. Juelich.
22. Savage, I. 1993: Demographic influences on risk perceptions. Risk Analysis 13: 413-420.
23. Siegrist, M. 2000: The influence of trust on perceptions of risk and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis 20: 195-203.
24. Sjöberg, L. 2000a: Factors in risk perception. Risk Analysis 20: 1-11.
25. Sjöberg, L. 2000b: The methodology of risk perception research. Quality and Quantity 34: 407-418.
26. Slovic, P. 1987: Perception of risk. Science 236: 280-285.
27. Slovic, P. 1992: Perceptions of risk: reflections on the psychometric paradigm. In S. Krimsky & D. Golding (eds), Social Theories of Risk: 117-152. Westport/London: Praeger.
28. Slovic, Paul, 1993: Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis 13: 675-682.
29. Szalay, L.B. & Deese, J. 1978: Subjective meaning and culture: An assessment through word associations. Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
30. Thompson, M., Ellis, R. & Wildavsky, A. 1990: Cultural theory. Boulder et al.: Westview Press.
31. Zwick, M. & Renn, O. (eds) 2002: Perception and evaluation of risk, findings of the "Baden-Württemberg Risk Survey 2001". Joint Working Report by the Center of Technology Assessment in Baden-Württemberg and University of Stuttgart, Sociology of Technologies and the Environment, Working paper No. 203. Stuttgart.