How people perceive and will cope with risks from the diffusion of ubiquitous information and communication technologies

Risk Analysis

Volumn 31, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 832-846

  Moser, Stephanie ^a   Bruppacher, Susanne Elisabeth ^b   Mosler, Hans Joachim ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FRIBOURG   (Switzerland)

^c SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF AQUATIC SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Coping appraisal; Protection motivation theory; Risk perception; Threat appraisal; Ubiquitous information and communication technologies

Indexed keywords

COPING APPRAISAL; COPING EFFICACY; INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES; NEGATIVE AFFECTS; PROTECTION-MOTIVATION THEORY; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING; THREAT APPRAISAL; UBIQUITOUS INFORMATION;

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; MOTIVATION; MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS; RISK ANALYSIS;

RISK PERCEPTION;

DATA SET; DIFFUSION; EQUATION; INHIBITION; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; NUMERICAL MODEL; PERCEPTION; PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSE; RISK FACTOR;

ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR; ARTICLE; GERMANY; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; COMMUNICATION; GERMANY; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; MODELS, THEORETICAL;

GERMANY;

EID: 79956121890     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01544.x     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Moore GE. No exponential is forever: But "forever" can be delayed. Pp. 20-23 in: Proceedings of the Solid-State Circuits Conference ISSCC; 2003 Feb 9-13; San Francisco, CA . IEEE International, 2003.
2. Weiser M. The computer for the 21st century. Scientific American, 1991; 265(3):94-104.
3. Mattern F. Ubiquitous computing: Scenarios for an informatized world. Pp. 145-163 in Zerdick A, Picot A, Schrape K, Burgelman J-C, Silverstone R, Feldmann V, Wernick C and Wolff C (eds). E-Merging Media-Communication and the Media Economy of the Future. Berlin Springer, 2005.
4. ITU. The Internet of Things. Executive Summary. Geneva ITU, 2005.
5. ITU. Digital Life. Geneva ITU, 2006.
6. Greenfield A. Everyware. The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing. Berkley New Riders, 2006.
7. Kruse L. Psychologische Aspekte des technischen Fortschritts [Psychological dimensions of technological progress]. Pp. 72-82 in Ropohl G (ed). Interdisziplinäre Technikforschung. Berlin Schmidt; 1981.
8. Stone A. The dark side of pervasive computing. Pervasive Computing, 2003; 2(1):4-8.
9. Stajano F. Security for Whom? The Shifting Security Assumption of Pervasive Computing. Berlin Springer, 2003.
10. Som C, Hilty L, Ruddy T. The precautionary principle in the information society. Human and Ecological Risk Assess, 2004; 10(5):787-799.
11. Lyon D. Facing the future: Seeking ethics for everyday surveillance. Ethics and Information Technology, 2001; 3(3):171-181.
12. Rogers RW. Protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology, 1975; 91(1):93-114.
13. Rogers RW. Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: A revised theory of protection motivation. Pp. 153-176 in Cacioppo JR, Petty RE (eds). Social Psychology: A Sourcebook. New York Guilford, 1983.
14. Rogers RW, Prentice-Dunn S. Protection motivation theory. Pp. 113-132 in Gochman DS (ed). Handbook of Health Behavior Research I: Personal and Social Determinants. New York Plenum Press, 1997.
15. Maddux JE, Rogers RW. Protection motivation and self-efficacy-A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1983; 19(5):469-479.
16. Pechmann C, Zhao G, Goldberg ME, Reibling ET. What to convey in antismoking advertisements for adolescents: The use of protection motivation theory to identify effective message themes. Journal of Marketing, 2003; 67(2):1-18.
17. Lazarus L. Psychological Stress and the Coping Process. New York McGraw-Hill, 1966.
18. Witte K. Fear as motivator, fear as inhibitor: Using the extended parallel process model to explain fear appeal successes and failures. Pp. 423-450 in Andersen PA, Guerrero LK (eds). Handbook of Communication and Emotion. London Academic Press, 1998.
19. Rippetoe PA, Rogers RW. Effects of components of protection-motivation theory on adaptive and maladaptive coping with a health threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1987; 52(3):596-604.
20. Peter U, Kaufmann-Hayoz R. The concept of control: A key concept in understanding and overcoming barriers to responsible environmental behavior. Pp. 307-322 in Perrig WJ, Grob A (eds). Control of Human Behavior, Mental Processes, and Conciousness. Manwan, NY Erlbaum, 2000.
21. Floyd DL, Prentice-Dunn S. A meta-analysis of research on protection motivation theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2000; 30(2):407-429.
22. Milne S, Sheeran P, Orbell S. Prediction and intervention in health-related behavior: A meta-analytic review of protection motivation theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2000; 30(1):106-143.
23. Gardner GT, Stern PC. Environmental Problems and Human Behavior. Boston, MA Allyn and Bacon, 1996.
24. Martens T, Rost J. Der Zusammenhang von wahrgenommener Bedrohung durch Umweltgefahren und der Ausbildung von Handlungsintentionen [The relation between perceived environmental threats and the building of intentions to act]. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 1998; 45(4):245-364.
25. Homburg A, Stolberg A. Explaining pro-environmental behavior with a cognitive theory of stress. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2006; 26(1):1-14.
26. Grothmann T, Reusswig F. People at risk of flooding: Why some residents take precautionary action while others do not. Natural Hazards, 2006; 38(1-2):101-120.
27. Rochford EB, Blocker TJ. Coping with "natural" hazards as stressors. The prediction of activism in a flood disaster. Environment and Behavior, 1991; 23(2):171-194.
28. Eagly AH, Chaiken S. The Psychology of Attitudes. Fort Worth Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, 1993.
29. Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. The affect heuristic. Pp. 397-420 in Gilovich T, Griffin D, Kahneman D (eds). Heuristics and Biasses. The Psychology of Intuitive Judgement. Cambridge, NY Cambridge University Press, 2002.
30. Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis, 2004; 24(2):311-322.
31. Peters E, Lipkus I, Diefenbach MA. The functions of affect in health communications and the construction of health preferences. Journal of Communication, 2006; 56:140-162.
32. Loewenstein GF, Weber EU, Hsee CK, Welch N. Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 2001; 127(2):267-286.
33. De Hoog N, Stroebe W, De Wit JBF. The impact of vulnerability to and severity of a health risk on processing and acceptance of fear-arousing communications: A meta-analysis. Review of General Psychology, 2007; 11(3):258-285.
34. Cameron LD. Anxiety, cognition, and responses to health threats. Pp. 157-183 in Cameron LD, Leventhal H (eds). The Self-Regulation of Health and Illness Behavior. London Routledge, 2003.
35. Nerb J, Spada H, Wahl S. Kognition und Emotion bei der Bewertung von Umweltschadensfällen: Modellierung und Empirie [Cognitions and emotions of the appraisal of environmental hazards: Modeling and empiricism]. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 1998; 45(4):251-269.
36. Karger CR, Wiedemann PM. Kognitive und affektive Komponenten der Bewertung von Umweltrisiken [Cognitive and affective components of the appraisal of environmental risks]. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 1998; 45(4):334-344.
37. Lerner JS, Keltner D. Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001; 81(1):146-159.
38. Siegrist M, Cvetkovich G, Roth C. Salient value similarity, social trust and risk/benefit perception. Risk Analysis, 2000; 20(3):353-362.
39. Siegrist M. The Influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis, 2000; 20(2):195-203.
40. Kuttschreuter M. Psychological determinants of reactions to food risk messages. Risk Analysis, 2006; 26(4):1045-1057.
41. Earle TC, Cvetkovich G. Social Trust: Toward a Cosmopolitan Society. Westport Praeger, 1995.
42. Siegrist M, Gutscher H. Flooding risks: A comparison of lay people's perceptions and expert's assessments in Switzerland. Risk Analysis, 2006; 26(4):971-979.
43. Kuttschreuter M, Gutteling JM. Experience-based processing of risk information: The case of the millennium bug. Journal of Risk Research, 2004; 7(1):3-16.
44. Behrens K, Löffler U. Aufbau des ADM-Stichproben-Systems [Design of the ADM sampling system]. Pp. 69-91 in ADM-Arbeitskreis Deutscher Markt- und Sozialforschungsinstitute, editor. Stichproben-Verfahren in der Umfrageforschung eine Darstellung für die Praxis. Opladen Leske/Budrich, 1999.
45. Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Datenreport 2008 [Data Report 2008]. Bonn SFG, 2008.
46. Wippermann C. Wahrnehmung von Chancen und Risiken von IKT und AACC in den Sozialen Milieus. Ergebnisse der Qualitativen Analyse. [Perception of Opportunities and Risks of ICT and AACC in Different Social Milieus. Results of Qualitative Analysis]. AACC Risk Report 2/2007. Hannover Ecolog, 2007.
47. Moser S, De Simoni F, Bruppacher SE. Subjektive Repräsentationen Ubiquitärer IKT Anwendungen im Ambulanten Gesundheitsbereich. [Subjective Representations of Ubiquitous ICT Applications in the Outpatient Health Sector]. AACC Risk Report 1/2010. Hannover Ecolog, 2010.
48. Streiner DL. Starting at the beginning: An introduction of coefficient alpha and internal consistency. Journal of Personality Assessment, 2003; 80(1):99-103.
49. Witte K, Allen M. A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campains. Health Education Behavior, 2000; 27(5):591-615.
50. Streiner DL. Being inconsistent about consistency: When coefficient alpha does and doesn't matter. Journal of Personality Assessment, 2003; 80(3):217-222.
51. Little TD, Cunningham WA, Shahar G, Widaman KF. To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 2002; 9(2):151-173.
52. Bollen KA, Long SJ. Testing Structural Equation Models. Newbury Park, CA Sage Publications, 1993.
53. Bryne MB. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS. Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programmings. Hillsdale, NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2001.
54. Hu L, Bentler PM. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 1998; 3(4):424-453.
55. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 1999; 6(1):1-55.
56. Meier K. Überall und Unsichtbar [Everywhere and Invisible]. St. Gallen Risiko-Dialog, 2005.
57. Siegrist M, Earle TC, Gutscher H, Keller C. Perception of mobile phone and base station risks. Risk Analysis, 2005; 25(5):1253-1264.
58. Siegrist M, Keller C, Kastenholz H, Frey S, Wiek A. Laypeople's and experts' perception of nanotechnology hazards. Risk Analysis, 2007; 27(1):59-69.
59. Schütz H, Wiedemann PM. Framing effects on risk perception of nanotechnology. Public Understanding of Science, 2008; 17(3):369-379.
60. Poortinga W, Pidgeon N. Exploring the structure of attitudes toward genetically modified food. Risk Analysis, 2006; 26(6):1707-1719.
61. Neuwirth K, Dunwoody S, Griffin RJ. Protection motivation and risk communication. Risk Analysis, 2000; 20(5):721-734.
62. Leventhal H, Diefenbach MA, Leventhal EA. Illness cognition: Using common sense to understand treatment adherence and affect cognition interactions. Cognitive Therapie and Research, 1992; 16(2):143-163.
63. Leventhal H. Findings and theory in the study of fear communication. Pp. 119-186 in Berkowitz L (ed). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York Academic Press, 1970.
64. Neitzke H-P, Calmbach M, Behrendt D, Kleinhückelkotten S, Wegner E, Wippermann C. Risks of ubiquitous information and communication technologies. GAIA, 2008; 17(4):362-369.
65. Wiebe DJ, Korbel C. Defensive denial, affect, and the self-regulation of health threats. Pp. 184-203 in Cameron LD, Leventhal H (eds). The Self-Regulation of Health and Illness Behavior. London/New York Routledge, 2003.
66. Block LG, Keller PA. Beyond protection motivation: An integrative theory of health appeals. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1998; 28(17):1584-1608.
67. Webb TL, Sheeran P. Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 2006; 132(2):249-268.
68. Meijnders AL, Midden CJH, Wilke HAM. Communications about environmental risks and risk-reducing behavior: The impact of fear on information processing. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2001; 31(4):754-777.
69. Das EHHJ, deWit JBF, Stroebe W. Fear appeals motivate acceptance of action recommendations: Evidence for a positive bias in the processing of persuasive messages. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2003; 29(5):650-664.
70. Griffin RJ, Dunwoody S. Risk communication, risk beliefs, and democracy: The case of agricultural biotechnology. Pp. 264-286 in Brossard D, Shanahan J, Nesbitt TC (eds). The Public, The Media, and Agricultural Biotechnology. Cambridge, MA CABI, 2007.
71. Griffin RJ, Dunwoody S, Neuwirth K. Proposed model of the relationship of risk information seeking and processing of the development of preventive behaviors. Environmental Research, 1999; 80(2):230-245.
72. Martens T. Handlungstypen als Grundlage für die Mass-schneiderung von umweltpsychologischen Informationen [Behavior types as the basis for tailoring environment psychological information]. Umweltpsychologie, 2007; 2(21):69-87.
73. Pfister H-R, Böhm G. The multiplicity of emotions: A framework of emotional functions in decision making. Judgment and Decision Making, 2008; 3(1):5-17.
74. Bostrom A, Fischhoff B. Communicating health risks of global climate change. Pp. 31-55 in Böhm G, Nerb J, McDaniels T, Spada H (eds). Environmental Risks: Perception, Evaluation and Management. Amsterdam JAI, 2001.
75. Frewer LJ. Environmental risk, public trust and perceived exclusion from risk management. Pp. 221-248 in Böhm G, Nerb J, McDaniels T, Spada H (eds). Environmental Risks: Perception, Evaluation and Management. Amsterdam JAI, 2001.
76. Frewer LJ. Trust, transparency, and social context: Implications for social amplification of risk. Pp. 123-137 in Pidgeon N, Kasperson RE, Slovic P (eds). The Social Amplification of Risk. Cambridge University Press, 2003.
77. McCallum DB, Covello V, Peters RG. The determinants of trust and credibility in environmental risk communication. Risk Analysis, 1997; 17(1):43-54.