IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v15y2018i6p1219-d151643.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Changes in Risk Perception of the Health Effects of Radiation and Mental Health Status: The Fukushima Health Management Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Yuriko Suzuki

    (Department of Mental Health Policy, National Institute of Mental Health, National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Tokyo 187-8553, Japan)

  • Yoshitake Takebayashi

    (Department of Health Risk Communication, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

  • Seiji Yasumura

    (Department of Public Health, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

  • Michio Murakami

    (Department of Health Risk Communication, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

  • Mayumi Harigane

    (Radiation Medical Science Center for the Fukushima Health Management Survey, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

  • Hirooki Yabe

    (Department of Neuropsychiatry, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

  • Tetsuya Ohira

    (Department of Epidemiology, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

  • Akira Ohtsuru

    (Department of Radiation Health Management, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

  • Satomi Nakajima

    (Department of Disaster Psychiatry, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

  • Masaharu Maeda

    (Department of Disaster Psychiatry, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

Abstract

After the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident, numerous evacuees reported poor mental health status and high-risk perceptions of the health effects of radiation. However, the temporal associations between these variables have not yet been examined. Using data from the Fukushima Health Survey, we examined changes in risk perception of the health effects of radiation over time and assessed the effects of mental health on such changes using logistic regression analysis. Risk perception for delayed effect pertains a brief on health effect in later life (delayed effect), whereas that of genetic effect pertains a brief on health effect of future children and grandchildren (genetic effect). We found that many participants showed consistently high or low-risk perceptions over all three study years (2011–2013) (for delayed effect: 59% and 41% of participants were in the low and high-risk perception groups, respectively; for genetic effect: 47% and 53%, respectively). Stronger traumatic reactions (≥50 on the PTSD Checklist–Specific) significantly affected the odds of being in the high-risk perception group for the delayed and genetic effects, with the associations being strongest soon after the disaster: The adjusted ORs (95%CIs) were 2.05 (1.82–2.31), 1.86 (1.61–2.15), and 1.88 (1.62–2.17) for the delayed effect in 2011, 2012, and 2013, respectively, and 2.18 (1.92–2.48), 2.05 (1.75–2.40), and 1.82 (1.55–2.15) for the genetic effect. As initial mental health status had the strongest impact on later risk perceptions of radiation, it should be considered in early response and communication efforts.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuriko Suzuki & Yoshitake Takebayashi & Seiji Yasumura & Michio Murakami & Mayumi Harigane & Hirooki Yabe & Tetsuya Ohira & Akira Ohtsuru & Satomi Nakajima & Masaharu Maeda, 2018. "Changes in Risk Perception of the Health Effects of Radiation and Mental Health Status: The Fukushima Health Management Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-11, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:6:p:1219-:d:151643
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/6/1219/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/6/1219/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Itaru Miura & Masato Nagai & Masaharu Maeda & Mayumi Harigane & Senta Fujii & Misari Oe & Hirooki Yabe & Yuriko Suzuki & Hideto Takahashi & Tetsuya Ohira & Seiji Yasumura & Masafumi Abe, 2017. "Perception of Radiation Risk as a Predictor of Mid-Term Mental Health after a Nuclear Disaster: The Fukushima Health Management Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-13, September.
    2. Ellen M. Peters & Burt Burraston & C. K. Mertz, 2004. "An Emotion‐Based Model of Risk Perception and Stigma Susceptibility: Cognitive Appraisals of Emotion, Affective Reactivity, Worldviews, and Risk Perceptions in the Generation of Technological Stigma," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5), pages 1349-1367, October.
    3. Bart Vyncke & Tanja Perko & Baldwin Van Gorp, 2017. "Information Sources as Explanatory Variables for the Belgian Health‐Related Risk Perception of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 570-582, March.
    4. Hajime Iwasa & Yuriko Suzuki & Tetsuya Shiga & Masaharu Maeda & Hirooki Yabe & Seiji Yasumura, 2016. "Psychometric Evaluation of the Japanese Version of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist in Community Dwellers Following the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Incident," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(2), pages 21582440166, June.
    5. Donald G. MacGregor & Raymond Fleming, 1996. "Risk Perception and Symptom Reporting," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(6), pages 773-783, December.
    6. Michael Siegrist & Bernadette Sütterlin, 2014. "Human and Nature‐Caused Hazards: The Affect Heuristic Causes Biased Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(8), pages 1482-1494, August.
    7. Genolini, Christophe & Alacoque, Xavier & Sentenac, Mariane & Arnaud, Catherine, 2015. "kml and kml3d: R Packages to Cluster Longitudinal Data," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 65(i04).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maiko Fukasawa & Maki Umeda & Tsuyoshi Akiyama & Naoko Horikoshi & Seiji Yasumura & Hirooki Yabe & Yuriko Suzuki & Evelyn J. Bromet & Norito Kawakami, 2022. "Worry about Radiation and Its Risk Factors Five to Ten Years after the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Disaster," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Masatsugu Orui & Satomi Nakajima & Yui Takebayashi & Akiko Ito & Maho Momoi & Masaharu Maeda & Seiji Yasumura & Hitoshi Ohto, 2018. "Mental Health Recovery of Evacuees and Residents from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident after Seven Years—Contribution of Social Network and a Desirable Lifestyle," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-16, October.
    3. Masatsugu Orui & Maiko Fukasawa & Naoko Horikoshi & Yuriko Suzuki & Norito Kawakami, 2020. "Development and Evaluation of a Gatekeeper Training Program Regarding Anxiety about Radiation Health Effects Following a Nuclear Power Plant Accident: A Single-Arm Intervention Pilot Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-15, June.
    4. Misari Oe & Yui Takebayashi & Hideki Sato & Masaharu Maeda, 2021. "Mental Health Consequences of the Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima Nuclear Disasters: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Joel Rasmussen & Petter B. Wikström, 2022. "Returning Home after Decontamination? Applying the Protective Action Decision Model to a Nuclear Accident Scenario," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-16, June.
    6. Kosuke Shirai & Nobuaki Yoshizawa & Yoshitake Takebayashi & Michio Murakami, 2019. "Modeling reconstruction-related behavior and evaluation of influences of major information sources," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, August.
    7. Makiko Orita & Yasuyuki Taira & Hitomi Matsunaga & Masaharu Maeda & Noboru Takamura, 2020. "Quality of Life and Intention to Return among Former Residents of Tomioka Town, Fukushima Prefecture 9 Years after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-9, September.
    8. Keiko Oishi & Makiko Orita & Yasuyuki Taira & Yuya Kashiwazaki & Hitomi Matsunaga & Noboru Takamura, 2021. "Risk Perception of Health Risks Associated with Radiation Exposure among Residents of Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-8, December.
    9. Joel Rasmussen & Mats Eriksson & Johan Martinsson, 2022. "Citizens’ Communication Needs and Attitudes to Risk in a Nuclear Accident Scenario: A Mixed Methods Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-17, June.
    10. Shuhei Nomura & Michio Murakami, 2018. "Public Health Preparedness for and Response to Nuclear Disasters: An Editorial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-4, November.
    11. Masatsugu Orui & Chihiro Nakayama & Nobuaki Moriyama & Masaharu Tsubokura & Kiyotaka Watanabe & Takeo Nakayama & Minoru Sugita & Seiji Yasumura, 2020. "Current Psychological Distress, Post-traumatic Stress, and Radiation Health Anxiety Remain High for Those Who Have Rebuilt Permanent Homes Following the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-14, December.

    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. Joanna Sokolowska & Patrycja Sleboda, 2015. "The Inverse Relation Between Risks and Benefits: The Role of Affect and Expertise," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1252-1267, July.
    2. Jinshu Cui & Heather Rosoff & Richard S. John, 2016. "Cumulative Response to Sequences of Terror Attacks Varying in Frequency and Trajectory," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(12), pages 2272-2284, December.
    3. Huiyun Zhu & Kecheng Liu, 2021. "Capturing the Interplay between Risk Perception and Social Media Posting to Support Risk Response and Decision Making," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-14, May.
    4. aus dem Moore, Nils & Brehm, Johannes & Breidenbach, Philipp & Ghosh, Arijit & Gruhl, Henri, 2022. "Flood risk perception after indirect flooding experience: Null results in the German housing market," Ruhr Economic Papers 976, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    5. Liana Fraenkel & Marilyn Stolar & Jonathan R. Bates & Richard L. Street Jr & Harjinder Chowdhary & Sarah Swift & Ellen Peters, 2018. "Variability in Affect and Willingness to Take Medication," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(1), pages 34-43, January.
    6. Zeynep Altinay & Eric Rittmeyer & Lauren L. Morris & Margaret A. Reams, 2021. "Public risk salience of sea level rise in Louisiana, United States," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(4), pages 523-536, December.
    7. Mei‐Chih Meg Tseng & Yi‐Ping Lin & Fu‐Chang Hu & Tsun‐Jen Cheng, 2013. "Risks Perception of Electromagnetic Fields in Taiwan: The Influence of Psychopathology and the Degree of Sensitivity to Electromagnetic Fields," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(11), pages 2002-2012, November.
    8. Jinshu Cui & Heather Rosoff & Richard S. John, 2018. "Public Response to a Near‐Miss Nuclear Accident Scenario Varying in Causal Attributions and Outcome Uncertainty," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 947-961, May.
    9. Peng Liu & Run Yang & Zhigang Xu, 2019. "How Safe Is Safe Enough for Self‐Driving Vehicles?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 315-325, February.
    10. Xia, Dongqin & Li, Yazhou & He, Yanling & Zhang, Tingting & Wang, Yongliang & Gu, Jibao, 2019. "Exploring the role of cultural individualism and collectivism on public acceptance of nuclear energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 208-215.
    11. Hanna Valerie Wolf & Tanja Perko & Peter Thijssen, 2020. "How to Communicate Food Safety after Radiological Contamination: The Effectiveness of Numerical and Narrative News Messages," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-19, June.
    12. Michael Siegrist & Philipp Hübner & Christina Hartmann, 2018. "Risk Prioritization in the Food Domain Using Deliberative and Survey Methods: Differences between Experts and Laypeople," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(3), pages 504-524, March.
    13. Sanya Carley & Stephen Ansolabehere & David M Konisky, 2019. "Are all electrons the same? Evaluating support for local transmission lines through an experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-16, July.
    14. Louie Rivers & Joseph Arvai & Paul Slovic, 2010. "Beyond a Simple Case of Black and White: Searching for the White Male Effect in the African‐American Community," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 65-77, January.
    15. Timothy Sim & Li-San Hung & Gui-Wu Su & Ke Cui, 2018. "Interpersonal communication sources and natural hazard risk perception: a case study of a rural Chinese village," 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. 94(3), pages 1307-1326, December.
    16. Liu, Peng & Zhang, Yawen & He, Zhen, 2019. "The effect of population age on the acceptable safety of self-driving vehicles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 341-347.
    17. Maura Mezzetti & Daniele Borzelli & Andrea d’Avella, 2022. "A Bayesian approach to model individual differences and to partition individuals: case studies in growth and learning curves," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 31(5), pages 1245-1271, December.
    18. Xu, Haifeng & Ding, Yi & Zhang, Cheng & Tan, Bernard C.Y., 2023. "Too official to be effective: An empirical examination of unofficial information channel and continued use of retracted articles," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    19. Nicholas Smith & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2014. "The Role of Emotion in Global Warming Policy Support and Opposition," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(5), pages 937-948, May.
    20. Carmen Keller & Michael Siegrist & Heinz Gutscher, 2006. "The Role of the Affect and Availability Heuristics in Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 631-639, June.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:6:p:1219-:d:151643. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.