IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v88y2016icp168-177.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Anti-nuclear behavioral intentions: The role of perceived knowledge, information processing, and risk perception

Author

Listed:
  • Zhu, Weiwei
  • Wei, Jiuchang
  • Zhao, Dingtao

Abstract

This study explored the key factors underlying people's anti-nuclear behavioral intentions. The protective action decision model and the heuristic–systematic model were integrated and adapted from a risk information perspective to construct a hypothetical model. A questionnaire study was conducted on a sample of residents near the Haiyang Nuclear Power Plant, which is under construction in Shandong Province, China (N=487). Results show that, as expected, perceived knowledge is vital in predicting people's information insufficiency, information seeking, systematic processing, and risk perception. Moreover, the inverted U relationship between perceived knowledge and anti-nuclear behavioral intentions is indicated in the study. Information insufficiency and information seeking also significantly predict systematic processing. Furthermore, people's behavioral intentions are motivated by risk perception but fail to be stimulated by systematic processing. Implications and recommendations for future research are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhu, Weiwei & Wei, Jiuchang & Zhao, Dingtao, 2016. "Anti-nuclear behavioral intentions: The role of perceived knowledge, information processing, and risk perception," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 168-177.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:88:y:2016:i:c:p:168-177
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2015.10.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421515301361
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.10.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ellen Ter Huurne & Jan Gutteling, 2008. "Information needs and risk perception as predictors of risk information seeking," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(7), pages 847-862, October.
    2. Sun, Chuanwang & Zhu, Xiting, 2014. "Evaluating the public perceptions of nuclear power in China: Evidence from a contingent valuation survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 397-405.
    3. Andrew Weyman & Nicholas Pidgeon & John Walls & Tom Horlick‐Jones, 2006. "Exploring Comparative Ratings and Constituent Facets of Public Trust in Risk Regulatory Bodies and Related Stakeholder Groups," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(6), pages 605-622.
    4. Aaker, Jennifer L & Maheswaran, Durairaj, 1997. "The Effect of Cultural Orientation on Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(3), pages 315-328, December.
    5. Simonson, Itamar & Huber, Joel & Payne, John, 1988. "The Relationship between Prior Brand Knowledge and Information Acquisition Order," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 14(4), pages 566-578, March.
    6. Brucks, Merrie, 1985. "The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, June.
    7. Craig W. Trumbo & Katherine A. McComas, 2003. "The Function of Credibility in Information Processing for Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 343-353, April.
    8. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    9. Park, C Whan & Mothersbaugh, David L & Feick, Lawrence, 1994. "Consumer Knowledge Assessment," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 71-82, June.
    10. Johnson, Eric J & Russo, J Edward, 1984. "Product Familiarity and Learning New Information," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 11(1), pages 542-550, June.
    11. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Keller, Carmen & Siegrist, Michael, 2011. "Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: Investigating an explanatory model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3621-3629, June.
    12. Mah, Daphne Ngar-yin & Hills, Peter & Tao, Julia, 2014. "Risk perception, trust and public engagement in nuclear decision-making in Hong Kong," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 368-390.
    13. Schuitema, Geertje & Anable, Jillian & Skippon, Stephen & Kinnear, Neale, 2013. "The role of instrumental, hedonic and symbolic attributes in the intention to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 39-49.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jing Zeng & Jiuchang Wei & Dingtao Zhao & Weiwei Zhu & Jibao Gu, 2017. "Information-seeking intentions of residents regarding the risks of nuclear power plant: an empirical study in China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 87(2), pages 739-755, June.
    2. Motz, Alessandra, 2021. "Consumer acceptance of the energy transition in Switzerland: The role of attitudes explained through a hybrid discrete choice model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. Jiuchang Wei & Ming Zhao & Fei Wang & Peng Cheng & Dingtao Zhao, 2016. "An Empirical Study of the Volkswagen Crisis in China: Customers’ Information Processing and Behavioral Intentions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 114-129, January.
    4. Xia Wu & Wei Qi & Xi Hu & Shanshan Zhang & Dingtao Zhao, 2017. "Consumers’ purchase intentions toward products against city smog: exploring the influence of risk information processing," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 88(1), pages 611-632, August.
    5. Hyun Joo Kwon & Mira Ahn & Jiyun Kang, 2021. "The Effects of Knowledge Types on Consumer Decision Making for Non-Toxic Housing Materials and Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-14, October.
    6. DeSarbo, Wayne S. & Choi, Jungwhan, 1998. "A latent structure double hurdle regression model for exploring heterogeneity in consumer search patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 423-455, November.
    7. Chuanhui Liao & Xiaomei Zhou & Dingtao Zhao, 2018. "An Augmented Risk Information Seeking Model: Perceived Food Safety Risk Related to Food Recalls," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-17, August.
    8. Flynn, Leisa Reinecke & Goldsmith, Ronald E., 1999. "A Short, Reliable Measure of Subjective Knowledge," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 57-66, September.
    9. Kim, Hyeyoung & House, Lisa A., 2014. "Linking Consumer Health Perceptions to Consumption of Nonalcoholic Beverages," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 0, pages 1-16.
    10. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Farla, Jacco C.M., 2014. "Identifying and explaining public preferences for the attributes of energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 71-82.
    11. Sanjay Kumar Mishra & Manoj Kumar, 2011. "How mutual fund investors’ objective and subjective knowledge impacts their information search and processing behaviour," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 16(1), pages 27-41, June.
    12. Wang, Shanyong & Wang, Jing & Lin, Shoufu & Li, Jun, 2019. "Public perceptions and acceptance of nuclear energy in China: The role of public knowledge, perceived benefit, perceived risk and public engagement," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 352-360.
    13. Manika, Danae & Dickert, Stephan & Golden, Linda L., 2021. "Check (it) yourself before you wreck yourself: The benefits of online health information exposure on risk perception and intentions to protect oneself," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    14. Ozer, Muammer, 2009. "The roles of product lead-users and product experts in new product evaluation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1340-1349, October.
    15. Peng Cheng & Zhe Ouyang & Yang Liu, 0. "The effect of information overload on the intention of consumers to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    16. Jaeyoung Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2021. "Can Political Trust Weaken the Relationship between Perceived Environmental Threats and Perceived Nuclear Threats? Evidence from South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-13, September.
    17. Yu Wang & Shanyong Wang & Jing Wang & Jiuchang Wei & Chenglin Wang, 2020. "An empirical study of consumers’ intention to use ride-sharing services: using an extended technology acceptance model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 397-415, February.
    18. Femke Hilverda & Margôt Kuttschreuter, 2018. "Online Information Sharing About Risks: The Case of Organic Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1904-1920, September.
    19. Hang Lu & APPC 2018–2019 ASK Group & Kenneth Winneg & Kathleen Hall Jamieson & Dolores Albarracín, 2020. "Intentions to Seek Information About the Influenza Vaccine: The Role of Informational Subjective Norms, Anticipated and Experienced Affect, and Information Insufficiency Among Vaccinated and Unvaccina," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 2040-2056, October.
    20. Riffat Ara Zannat Tama & Md Mahmudul Hoque & Ying Liu & Mohammad Jahangir Alam & Mark Yu, 2023. "An Application of Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to Examining Farmers’ Behavioral Attitude and Intention towards Conservation Agriculture in Bangladesh," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-22, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:88:y:2016:i:c:p:168-177. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.