Deliberative Disjunction: Expert and Public Understanding of Outcome Uncertainty

Risk Analysis

Volumn 32, Issue 12, 2012, Pages 2071-2083

  Gregory, Robin ^a   Dieckmann, Nathan ^a   Peters, Ellen ^b   Failing, Lee ^c   Long, Graham ^c   Tusler, Martin ^b  

^a DECISION RESEARCH   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c Graham Long Compass Resource Management   (Canada)

Author keywords

Deliberation; Environment; Experts; Risk management; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING PROCESS; DELIBERATION; ENVIRONMENT; EXPERTS; MANAGEMENT DECISIONS; NUMERICAL RANGE; PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING; REALISTIC SCENARIO; TECHNICAL EXPERTS; UNCERTAINTY; UNCERTAINTY INFORMATIONS; WEB-BASED SURVEYS;

RISK MANAGEMENT;

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT;

DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL RISK; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; RISK ASSESSMENT; TRADE-OFF; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

ADULT; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERNET; MIDDLE AGED; UNCERTAINTY;

ADULT; DATA COLLECTION; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; INTERNET; MIDDLE AGED; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 84871167316     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01825.x     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. National Research Council (NRC). Committee on risk characterization. In Stern PC, Fineberg HV (eds). Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington, DC : National Academy Press, 1996.
2. Gregory R, McDaniels T. Improving environmental decision processes. Pp. 175-199 in Brewer GD, Stern PS (eds). Decision Making for the Environment: Social and Behavioral Science Research Priorities. Washington, DC : National Academies Press; 2005.
3. Cullen A, Small M. Uncertain risk: The role and limits of quantitative assessment. in McDaniels T, Small M (eds). Risk Analysis and Society. New York : Cambridge University Press, 2004.
4. Borusk M, Clemen R, MacGuire L, Reckhow K. Stakeholder values and scientific modeling in the Neuse River watershed. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2001; 10(4):355-373.
5. Gregory R, Failing L. Using decision analysis to encourage sound deliberation: Water use planning in British Columbia, Canada. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2002; 21:492-499.
6. Renn O, Klinke A. Systemic risks: A new challenge for risk management. EMBO Reports, 2004; 5(Suppl. 1):S41-S46.
7. National Research Council. Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment Washington, DC : The National Academies Press; 2009.
8. Peters E, Dieckmann NF, Västfjäll D, Mertz CK, Slovic P, Hibbard JH. Bringing meaning to numbers: The impact of evaluative categories on decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 2009; 15:213-227.
9. Visschers V, Meertens R, Passchier W, DeVries N. Probability information in risk communication: A review of the research literature. Risk Analysis, 2009; 29:267-287.
10. Dieckmann N, Gregory R, Peters, E. Making sense of uncertainty: Advantages and disadvantages of providing and evaluative structure. Journal of Risk Research, 2012; 1-19.
11. Budescu DV, Wallsten TS. Processing linguistic probabilities: General principles and empirical evidence. Pp. 275-318 in Busemeyer JR, Hastie R, Medin D (eds). The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Decision Making From the Perspective of Cognitive Psychology. New York : Academic Press, 1995.
12. Wallsten TS, Budescu DV, Erev I, Diederich A. Evaluating and combining subjective probability estimates. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 1997; 10(3):243-268.
13. Morgan MG, Dowlatabadi H, Henrion M, Keith D, Lempert R, McBride S, Small M, Wibanks T (eds). Best Practices Approaches for Characterizing, Communicating, and Incorporating Scientific Uncertainty in Climate Decision Making, Report no. CCSP 5.2. Washington, DC, January 2009. Available at: http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap5--2/sap5--2-final-report-all.pdf, Accessed on November 26, 2011.
14. Klinke A, Renn O. A new approach to risk evaluation and management: Risk-based, precaution-based, and discourse-based strategies. Risk Analysis, 2002; 22(6):1071-1094.
15. Ibrekk H, Morgan MG. Graphical communication of uncertain quantities to nontechnical people. Risk Analysis, 1987; 7(4):519-529.
16. Fischhoff B, Bostrom A, Quadrel MJ. Risk perception and communication. Pp. 1105-1123 in Detels R, McEwen J, Beaglehole R, Tanaka H (eds). Oxford Textbook of Public Health. 4th ed. Vol. 3. UK : Oxford University Press, 2002.
17. Budescu DV, Broomell S, Por HH. Improving communication of uncertainty in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Psychological Science, 2009; 20:299-308.
18. Reyna VF, Nelson W, Han P, Dieckmann NF. How numeracy influences risk reduction and medical decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 2009; 135:943-973.
19. Peters E, Hibbard JH, Slovic P, Dieckmann NF. Numeracy skill and the communication, comprehension, and use of risk-benefit information. Health Affairs, 2007; 26:741-748.
20. Keller C. Using a familiar risk comparison within a risk ladder to improve risk understanding by low numerates: A study of visual attention. Risk Analysis, 2011; 31:1043-1054.
21. Dieckmann NF, Slovic P, Peters E. The use of narrative evidence and explicit likelihood by decision makers varying in numeracy. Risk Analysis, 2009; 29:1473-1488.
22. Burgman M, Carr A, Godden L, Gregory R, McBride M, Flander L, Maguire L. Redefining expertise and improving ecological judgment. Conservation Letters, 2011; 4(2):81-87.
23. Hsee CK. The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1996; 67:247-257.
24. Gregory R. Incorporating value trade-offs into community-based environmental risk decisions. Environmental Values, 2002; 11:461-488.
25. Conroy MJ, Barker RJ, Dillingham PW, Fletcher D, Gormley AM, Westbrooke IM. Application of decision theory to conservation management: Recovery of Hector's dolphin. Wildlife Research, 2008; 35:93-102.
26. Keeney RL. Decision analysis: An overview. Operations Research, 1982; 30:803-838.
27. Gregory R, Failing L, Harstone M, Long G, McDaniels T, Ohlson D. Structured Decision Making: A Practical Guide to Environmental Management Choices. Chichester, West Sussex, UK : Wiley-Blackwell; 2012.
28. Clemen RT. Making Hard Decisions: An Introduction to Decision Analysis, 4th ed. Belmont, CA : Duxbury, 2004.
29. Zuk T, Carpendale S. Theoretical analysis of uncertainty visualizations. In Visualization and Data Analysis 2006: Proceedings of SPIE 6060, January 2006, San Jose, CA Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.643631, Accessed November 26, 2011.
30. Weller JA, Dieckmann NF, Tusler M, Mertz, CK, Peters, E. Development and testing of an abbreviated numeracy scale: A Rasch analysis approach. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, in press.
31. Lichtenstein S, Gregory R, Irwin J. What's bad is easy: Taboo values, affect, and cognition. Judgment and Decision Making, 2007; 2:169-188.
32. Drolet A, Luce MF. The rationalizing effect of cognitive load on emotion-based trade-off avoidance. Journal of Consumer Research, 2004; 31:63-77.
33. Nickerson RS. How we know-and sometimes misjudge-what others know: Imputing one's own knowledge to others. Psychological Bulletin, 1999; 125(6):737-759.
34. Wilson EB. Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1927; 22(158):209-212.