Public reception of scientific uncertainty in the endocrine disrupter controversy: The case of male fertility

Journal of Risk Research

Volumn 16, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 677-695

  Maxim, Laura ^a   Mansier, Pascale ^a   Grabar, Natalia ^b  

^a CNRS   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE LILLE   (France)

Author keywords

communication; controversy; endocrine disrupter; risk communication; uncertainty

Indexed keywords

CONTROVERSY; DECISION MAKERS; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; REPRODUCTIVE DISORDERS; RISK COMMUNICATION; SCIENTIFIC UNCERTAINTY; SOURCES OF UNCERTAINTY; UNCERTAINTY;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; COMMUNICATION; ENDOCRINE DISRUPTERS;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

EID: 84878944188     PISSN: 13669877     EISSN: 14664461     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2012.726245     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Brashers, D.E. 2001. Communication and uncertainty management. Journal of Communication 51, no. 3: 477-97.
2. Brewer, P.R., and B.L. Ley. 2011. Multiple exposures: Scientific controversy, the media, and public responses to bisphenol A. Science Communication 33, no. 1: 76-97.
3. Carnegie Commission 2011. Risk and the environment, improving regulatory decision making. www.ccstg.org/pdfs/RiskEnvironment0693.pdf. (accessed 4 December 2011).
4. Chow, C.C., and R.K. Sarin. 2001. Comparative ignorance and the Ellsberg paradox. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 22, no. 2: 129-39.
5. Commission of the European Communities. 1999. Community strategy for endocrine disrupters. Brussels, COM(1999) 706 final.
6. Fessenden-Raden, F., J.M. Fitchen, and J.S. Heath. 1987. Providing risk information in communities: Factors influencing what is heard and accepted. Science, Technology and Human Values 12: 94-101.
7. Frankland, J., and M. Bloor. 1999. Some issues arising in the systematic analysis of focus group materials. In Developing focus group research. Politics, theory and practice, ed. Barbour R.S. and J. Kitzinger, 144-55. London: Sage.
8. Frewer, L.J., S. Hunt, M. Brennan, S. Kuznesof, M. Ness, and C. Ritson. 2003. The view of scientific experts on how the public conceptualize uncertainty. Journal of risk research 6, no. 1: 75-85.
9. Funtowicz, S.O., and J.R. Ravetz. 1990. Uncertainty and quality in science for policy. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
10. Habicht, F.H. 1992. Guidance to risk characterization for risk managers and risk assessors. Washington, DC: US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of the administrator.
11. Heath, C., and A. Tversky. 1991. Preference and belief: Ambiguity and competence in choice under uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 4: 5-28.
12. Jégou, B., P. Jouannet, and A. Spira. 2009. La fertilité est-elle en danger? [Is fertility in danger?]. Paris: La Découverte.
13. Johnson, B.B., and P. Slovic. 1995. Presenting uncertainty in health risk assessment: Initial studies on its effects on risk perception and trust. Risk analysis 15, no. 4: 485-94.
14. Johnson, B.B., and P. Slovic. 1996. Lay views on uncertainty in health risk assessment: A report on phase II research. Trenton, NJ: US Environmental Agency for Environmental Protection.
15. Kahneman, D., P. Slovic, and A. Tversky, eds. 1982. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, 3-20. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
16. Keynes, J.M. 1921(1996). Treatise on probability. Collected writings, Vol. VIII. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. First published in 1921.
17. Keynes, J.M. 1937. The general theory of employment. Quarterly Journal of Economics 51, no. 2: 209-23.
18. Knight, F. 1921(2006). Risk, uncertainty and profit. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications. First published in 1921 by the Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston and New York.
19. Kuhn, K.M. 1997. Communicating uncertainty: Framing effects on responses to vague probabilities. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 71, no. 1: 55-83.
20. Marris, C., B. Wynne, P. Simmons, and S. Weldon. 2001. Public perceptions of agricultural biotechnologies in Europe. Final report from the PABE research project.
21. Morton, T.A., A. Rabinovich, D. Marshall, and P. Bretschneider. 2011. The future that may (or may not) come: How framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Global Environmental Change 21: 103-9.
22. Patt, A.G., and D.P. Schrag. 2003. Using specific language to describe risk and probability. Climatic Change 61: 17-30.
23. Powell, M., S. Dunwoody, R. Griffin, and K. Neuwirth. 2007. Exploring lay uncertainty about an environmental health risk. Public Understanding of Science 16: 323-43.
24. Renn, O. 2011. Science and society: Public engagement and confidence in science. Paper presented at the EFSA consultative workshop on Independence and Scientific Decision-Making, October 12, in Brussels.
25. Rogers, C.L. 1999. The importance of understanding audiences. In Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science, ed. S.M. Friedman, S. Dunwoody, and C.L. Rogers, 179-200. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26. Siegrist, M., N. Stampfli, H. Kastenholz, and C. Keller. 2008. Perceived risk and perceived benefits of different nanotechnology food packaging. Appetite 51: 283-90.
27. Silverman, D. 2011. Interpreting qualitative data. A guide to principles of qualitative research. 4th ed. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
28. Slovic, P. 1993. Perceived risk, trust and democracy: A systems perspective. Risk analysis 13: 675-82.
29. Slovic, P., B. Fischhoff, and S. Lichtenstein. 1982. Response mode, framing and information-processing effects in risk assessment. In New directions for methodology of social and behavioral science. Question framing and response consistency, ed. R. Hogarth, 21-36. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
30. Slovic, P., S. Lichtenstein, and B. Fischhoff. 1984. Modeling the societal impact of fatal accidents. Management Science 30: 464-74.
31. Sørensen, J. 2008. Measuring emotions in a consumer decision-making context-approaching or avoiding. Working Paper Series, Department of Business Studies, No. 20, Aalborg: Aalbog University.
32. Van der Sluijs, J. 2002. A way out of the credibility crisis of models used in integrated environmental assessment. Futures 34: 133-46.
33. Van der Sluijs, J., M. Craye, S. Funtowicz, P. Kloprogge, J. Ravetz, and J. Risbey. 2005. Combining quantitative and qualitative measures of uncertainty in model-based environmental assessment: The NUSAP system. Risk analysis 25, no. 2: 481-92.
34. Weinstein, N.D. 1987. Public perceptions of environmental hazards: Statewide poll of environmental perceptions. Final report to the New Jersey department of environmental protection. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.