Communication About Micropollutants in Drinking Water: Effects of the Presentation and Psychological Processes

Risk Analysis

Volumn 36, Issue 10, 2016, Pages 2011-2026

  Tobias, Robert ^a  

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

Author keywords

Affective reaction; drinking water; micropollutant; repeated measurement; trust

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; POTABLE WATER; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; WATER;

AFFECTIVE REACTIONS; EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS; LOW CONCENTRATIONS; MICROPOLLUTANTS; POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE EFFECT; PSYCHOLOGICAL PROCESS; REPEATED MEASUREMENTS; TRUST;

RISK PERCEPTION;

CONCENTRATION (COMPOSITION); DRINKING WATER; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; FOOD INTAKE; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK PERCEPTION; WATER QUALITY;

SWITZERLAND; ZURICH [SWITZERLAND];

EID: 84941661837     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/risa.12485     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Gogic B. Pestizide und MedikamenteimTrinkwasser [Pesticides and medicaments in drinking water], 2012. Available at: http://www.srf.ch/konsum/themen/gesundheit/pestizide-und-medikamente-im-trinkwasser, Accessed on November 1, 2013.
2. BAG. Umgang mit nicht geregelten Fremdstoffen im Trinkwasser [Management of non-regulated contaminants in drinking water], 2012. Available at: http://www.bag.admin.ch/themen/lebensmittel/04858/04864/04903/14544/index.html?lang=de, Accessed on November 1, 2013.
3. Dickson-Spillmann M, Siegrist M, Keller C, Wormuth M. Phthalate exposure through food and consumers’ risk perception of chemicals in food. Risk Analysis, 2009; 29(8):1170–1181.
4. Heinzmann B, Schwarz R-J, Schuster P, Pineau C. Decentralized collection of iodinated x-ray contrast media in hospitals—Results of the feasibility study and the practice test phase. Water Science & Technology, 2008; 57(2):209–214.
5. Morgan GM, Fischhoff B, Bostrom A, Atman CJ. Risk Communication. A Mental Models Approach. Cambridge, MA: University Press, 2002.
6. Sjöberg L. Factors in risk perception. Risk Analysis, 2000; 20(1):1–12.
7. Schwarz N, Clore GL. Feelings and phenomenal experiences. Pp. 433–465 in Higgins ET, Kumpf M (eds). Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles. New York: Guilford, 1996.
8. Löwenstein GF, Weber EU, Hsee CK, Welch N. Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 2001; 127(2):267–286.
9. Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. The affect heuristic. European Journal of Operational Research, 2007; 177(3):1333–1352.
10. Finucane MM, Alhakami A, Slovic P, Johnson SM. The affect heuristic in judgements of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2000; 13:1–17.
11. Slovic P, Finucane MM, 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.
12. Slovic P, MacGregor DG, Malmfors T, Purchase IFH. Influence of affective processes on toxicologists' judgements of risk. Report No. 99-2. Eugene, OR: Decision Research, 1999.
13. Bord RJ, O'Connor RE. Risk communication, knowledge, and attitudes: Explaining reactions to a technology perceived as risky. Risk Analysis, 1990; 10(4):499–506.
14. Flynn J, Burns WJ, Mertz CK, Slovic P. Trust as a determinant of opposition to a high-level radioactive waste repository: Analysis of a structural model. Risk Analysis, 1992; 12(3):417–429.
15. Slovic P. Perceived risk, trust and democracy. Risk Analysis, 1993; 13:675–682.
16. Earle TC, Siegrist M, Gutscher H. Trust, risk perception, and the TCC model of cooperation. Pp. 1–49 in Siegrist M, Earle TC, Gutscher H (eds). Trust in Cooperative Risk Management: Uncertainty and Scepticism in the Public Mind. London: Earthscan, 2007.
17. Visschers VHM, Siegrist M. Exploring the triangular relationship between trust, affect, and risk perception: A review of the literature. Risk Management, 2008; 10:156–167.
18. Siegrist M, Cousin ME, Kastenholz M, Wiek A. Public acceptance of nanotechnology foods and food packaging: The influence of affect and trust. Appetite, 2007; 49:459–466.
19. Poortinga W, Pidgeon N. Trust in risk regulation: Cause or consequence of the acceptability of GM food?Risk Analysis, 2005; 25:199–209.
20. Visschers VHM, Siegrist M. How a nuclear power plant accident influences acceptance of nuclear power: Results of a longitudinal study before and after the Fukushima disaster. Risk Analysis, 2013; 33(2):333–347.
21. Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science, 1987; 236:280–285.
22. Hanselmann M, Tanner C. Taboos and conflicts in decision making: Sacred values, decision difficulty, and emotions. Judgment and Decision Making, 2008; 3:51–63.
23. Baron J, Spranca M. Protected values. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1997; 70:1–16.
24. Lichtenstein S, Gregory R, Irwin J. What's bad is easy: Taboo values, affect, and cognition. Judgment and Decision Making, 2007; 2:169–188.
25. Davidson DJ, Freudenburg WR. Gender and evironmental risk concerns. A review and analysis of available research. Environment and Behavior, 1996; 28:302–339.
26. Finucane MM, Slovic P, Mertz CK, Flynn J. Satterfield TA. Gender, race and perceived risk: The "white male" effect. Health, Risk & Society, 2000; 2(2):159–172.
27. Law KS, Wong CS, Mobley WH. Toward a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs. Academy of Management Review, 1998; 23:741–755.
28. Borsboom D, Mellenbergh GJ, vanHeerden J. The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychological Review, 2003; 110:203–219.
29. Tanner C, Ryf B, Hanselmann M. GeschützteWerteSkala (GWS). Diagnostica, 2009; 55(3):174–183.
30. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 2008; 40(3):879–891.
31. Siegrist M, Sütterlin B. Human and nature-caused hazards: The affect heuristic causes biased decisions. Risk Analysis, 2014; 34(8):1482–1494.
32. Earle TC. Trust in risk management: A model-based review of empirical research. Risk Analysis, 2010; 30(4):541–574.
33. Slovic P. Perceived risk, trust and democracy. Risk Analysis, 1993; 13:675–682.
34. Trettin L, Musham C. Is trust a realistic goal of environmental risk communication? Environment and Behavior, 2000; 32:410–425.
35. Earle TC, Siegrist M. Morality information, performance information, and the distinction between trust and confidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2006; 36:383–416.
36. Epley N, Caruso EM. Egocentric ethics. Social Justice Research, 2004; 17:171–187.
37. Ross VL, Fielding KS, Louis WR. Social trust, risk perceptions and public acceptance of recycled water: Testing a social-psychological model. Journal of Environmental Management, 2014; 137:61–68.