IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i9p3255-d354816.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Landscape of Risk Communication Research: A Scientometric Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Floris Goerlandt

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H 4R2, Canada)

  • Jie Li

    (Department of Safety Science and Engineering, School of Ocean Science and Engineering, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai 201306, China
    State Key Laboratory of Explosion Science and Technology, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China)

  • Genserik Reniers

    (Safety and Security Science, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, 2628 BX Delft, The Netherlands
    Antwerp Research Group on Safety and Security (ARGoSS), Faculty of Applied Economics, University of Antwerp, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium
    Centre for Economics and Corporate Sustainability (CEDON), KU Leuven, 1000 Brussels, Belgium)

Abstract

Risk communication is a significant research domain with practical importance in supporting societal risk governance and informed private decision making. In this article, a high-level analysis of the risk communication research domain is performed using scientometrics methods and visualization tools. Output trends and geographical patterns are identified, and patterns in scientific categories determined. A journal distribution analysis provides insights into dominant journals and the domain’s intellectual base. Thematic clusters and temporal evolution of focus topics are obtained using a terms analysis, and a co-citation analysis provides insights into the evolution of research fronts and key documents. The results indicate that the research volume grows exponentially, with by far most contributions originating from Western countries. The domain is highly interdisciplinary, rooted in psychology and social sciences, and branching mainly into medicine and environmental sciences. Narrative themes focus on risk communication in medical and societal risk governance contexts. The domain originated from public health and environmental concerns, with subsequent research fronts addressing risk communication concepts and models. Applied research fronts are associated with environmental hazards, public health, medical risks, nuclear power, and emergency response to various natural hazards. Based on the results, various avenues for future research are described.

Suggested Citation

  • Floris Goerlandt & Jie Li & Genserik Reniers, 2020. "The Landscape of Risk Communication Research: A Scientometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-31, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:9:p:3255-:d:354816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/9/3255/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/9/3255/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William Leiss, 1996. "Three Phases in the Evolution of Risk Communication Practice," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 545(1), pages 85-94, May.
    2. Adrian Edwards & Glyn Elwyn, 1999. "How Should Effectiveness of Risk Communication to Aid Patients' Decisions Be Judged?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 19(4), pages 428-434, October.
    3. Aria, Massimo & Cuccurullo, Corrado, 2017. "bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 959-975.
    4. Pilar Aparicio-Martinez & Alberto-Jesus Perea-Moreno & María Pilar Martinez-Jimenez & María Dolores Redel-Macías & Manuel Vaquero-Abellan & Claudia Pagliari, 2019. "A Bibliometric Analysis of the Health Field Regarding Social Networks and Young People," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-25, October.
    5. Adrian Edwards & Kerenza Hood & Elaine Matthews & Daphne Russell & Ian Russell & Jacqueline Barker & Michael Bloor & Philip Burnard & Judith Covey & Roisin Pill & Clare Wilkinson & Nigel Stott, 2000. "The Effectiveness of One-to-one Risk-communication Interventions in Health Care," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 20(3), pages 290-297, July.
    6. Myrtill Simkó & Mats-Olof Mattsson, 2019. "5G Wireless Communication and Health Effects—A Pragmatic Review Based on Available Studies Regarding 6 to 100 GHz," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-23, September.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:3:p:263-274 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Nancy Kraus & Torbjörn Malmfors & Paul Slovic, 1992. "Intuitive Toxicology: Expert and Lay Judgments of Chemical Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(2), pages 215-232, June.
    9. Chaomei Chen, 2006. "CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(3), pages 359-377, February.
    10. Lennart Sjöberg, 2000. "Factors in Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    11. Henry Small, 1973. "Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 24(4), pages 265-269, July.
    12. Andy Stirling, 2007. "A General Framework for Analysing Diversity in Science, Technology and Society," SPRU Working Paper Series 156, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    13. Meen Chul Kim & Yongjun Zhu & Chaomei Chen, 2016. "How are they different? A quantitative domain comparison of information visualization and data visualization (2000–2014)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(1), pages 123-165, April.
    14. Baruch Fischhoff, 1995. "Risk Perception and Communication Unplugged: Twenty Years of Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 137-145, April.
    15. Roger E. Kasperson & Ortwin Renn & Paul Slovic & Halina S. Brown & Jacque Emel & Robert Goble & Jeanne X. Kasperson & Samuel Ratick, 1988. "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 177-187, June.
    16. Guadagnoli, Edward & Ward, Patricia, 1998. "Patient participation in decision-making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 329-339, August.
    17. Stone, Eric R. & Sieck, Winston R. & Bull, Benita E. & Frank Yates, J. & Parks, Stephanie C. & Rush, Carolyn J., 2003. "Foreground:background salience: Explaining the effects of graphical displays on risk avoidance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 19-36, January.
    18. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman & Ed C. M. Noyons & Reindert K. Buter, 2010. "Automatic term identification for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(3), pages 581-596, March.
    19. Mingers, John & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2015. "A review of theory and practice in scientometrics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 1-19.
    20. Ragnar E. Lofstedt, 2006. "How can we Make Food Risk Communication Better: Where are we and Where are we Going?," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(8), pages 869-890, December.
    21. Olle Persson, 1994. "The intellectual base and research fronts of JASIS 1986–1990," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 45(1), pages 31-38, January.
    22. Roger Kasperson, 2014. "Four questions for risk communication," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(10), pages 1233-1239, November.
    23. Peter Blokland & Genserik Reniers, 2019. "An Ontological and Semantic Foundation for Safety and Security Science," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-25, October.
    24. Sven Ove Hansson & Terje Aven, 2014. "Is Risk Analysis Scientific?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1173-1183, July.
    25. Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Ree M. Meertens & Wim W. F. Passchier & Nanne N. K. De Vries, 2009. "Probability Information in Risk Communication: A Review of the Research Literature," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 267-287, February.
    26. P. Bubeck & W. J. W. Botzen & J. C. J. H. Aerts, 2012. "A Review of Risk Perceptions and Other Factors that Influence Flood Mitigation Behavior," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1481-1495, September.
    27. Isaac M. Lipkus, 2007. "Numeric, Verbal, and Visual Formats of Conveying Health Risks: Suggested Best Practices and Future Recommendations," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 27(5), pages 696-713, September.
    28. Aven, Terje, 2012. "The risk concept—historical and recent development trends," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 33-44.
    29. Jie Li & Floris Goerlandt & Kai Way Li, 2019. "Slip and Fall Incidents at Work: A Visual Analytics Analysis of the Research Domain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-18, December.
    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. ShaoPeng Che & Pim Kamphuis & Shunan Zhang & Xiangying Zhao & Jang Hyun Kim, 2022. "A Visualization Analysis of Crisis and Risk Communication Research Using CiteSpace," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-24, March.
    2. Shalini Upadhyay & Nitin Upadhyay, 2023. "Mapping crisis communication in the communication research: what we know and what we don’t know," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Bote Qi & Shuting Jin & Hongsheng Qian & Yu Zou, 2020. "Bibliometric Analysis of Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy Research from 1999 to 2019," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-15, July.
    4. Feng Wu & Yue Tang & Chaoran Lin & Yanwei Zhang & Wanqiang Xu, 2022. "Knowledge Trajectories Detection and Prediction of Modern Emergency Management in China Based on Topic Mining from Massive Literature Text," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Qiong Dang & Zhongming Luo & Chuhao Ouyang & Lin Wang, 2021. "First Systematic Review on Health Communication Using the CiteSpace Software in China: Exploring Its Research Hotspots and Frontiers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-25, December.
    6. Beatriz Martín-del-Río & Marie-Carmen Neipp & Adrián García-Selva & Angel Solanes-Puchol, 2021. "Positive Organizational Psychology: A Bibliometric Review and Science Mapping Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-17, May.
    7. Olugbenga Oladinrin & Kasun Gomis & Wadu Mesthrige Jayantha & Lovelin Obi & Muhammad Qasim Rana, 2021. "Scientometric Analysis of Global Scientific Literature on Aging in Place," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-16, November.

    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. Floris Goerlandt & Jie Li & Genserik Reniers, 2021. "The Landscape of Risk Perception Research: A Scientometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-26, November.
    2. P. Marijn Poortvliet & Anne Marike Lokhorst, 2016. "The Key Role of Experiential Uncertainty when Dealing with Risks: Its Relationships with Demand for Regulation and Institutional Trust," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1615-1629, August.
    3. Aven, Terje, 2018. "Perspectives on the nexus between good risk communication and high scientific risk analysis quality," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 290-296.
    4. Theresa A. K. Knoblauch & Michael Stauffacher & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2018. "Communicating Low‐Probability High‐Consequence Risk, Uncertainty and Expert Confidence: Induced Seismicity of Deep Geothermal Energy and Shale Gas," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(4), pages 694-709, April.
    5. Filippo Corsini & Rafael Laurenti & Franziska Meinherz & Francesco Paolo Appio & Luca Mora, 2019. "The Advent of Practice Theories in Research on Sustainable Consumption: Past, Current and Future Directions of the Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, January.
    6. Zhichao Wang & Valentin Zelenyuk, 2021. "Performance Analysis of Hospitals in Australia and its Peers: A Systematic Review," CEPA Working Papers Series WP012021, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    7. Shuo Xu & Liyuan Hao & Xin An & Hongshen Pang & Ting Li, 2020. "Review on emerging research topics with key-route main path analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 607-624, January.
    8. Toshiyuki Hasumi & Mei-Shiu Chiu, 2022. "Online mathematics education as bio-eco-techno process: bibliometric analysis using co-authorship and bibliographic coupling," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4631-4654, August.
    9. Aven, Terje, 2020. "Three influential risk foundation papers from the 80s and 90s: Are they still state-of-the-art?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    10. Andrej Kastrin & Dimitar Hristovski, 2021. "Scientometric analysis and knowledge mapping of literature-based discovery (1986–2020)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1415-1451, February.
    11. Batista-Canino, Rosa M. & Santana-Hernández, Lidia & Medina-Brito, Pino, 2024. "A holistic literature review on entrepreneurial Intention: A scientometric approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    12. Sandip Solanki & Seema Singh & Meeta Joshi, 2023. "A Bibliometric Analysis of the International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy: 2013-2022," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 13(5), pages 260-270, September.
    13. Mauricio Marrone, 2020. "Application of entity linking to identify research fronts and trends," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 357-379, January.
    14. Eric R. Stone & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Abigail M. Wilkins & Emily M. Boker & Jacqueline MacDonald Gibson, 2017. "Designing Graphs to Communicate Risks: Understanding How the Choice of Graphical Format Influences Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(4), pages 612-628, April.
    15. Jie Li & Floris Goerlandt & Kai Way Li, 2019. "Slip and Fall Incidents at Work: A Visual Analytics Analysis of the Research Domain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-18, December.
    16. Rianne van Duinen & Tatiana Filatova & Peter Geurts & Anne van der Veen, 2015. "Empirical Analysis of Farmers' Drought Risk Perception: Objective Factors, Personal Circumstances, and Social Influence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 741-755, April.
    17. Dingde Xu & Linmei Zhuang & Xin Deng & Cheng Qing & Zhuolin Yong, 2020. "Media Exposure, Disaster Experience, and Risk Perception of Rural Households in Earthquake-Stricken Areas: Evidence from Rural China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-20, May.
    18. Yao, Ye & Du, Huibin & Zou, Hongyang & Zhou, Peng & Antunes, Carlos Henggeler & Neumann, Anne & Yeh, Sonia, 2023. "Fifty years of Energy Policy: A bibliometric overview," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    19. Qian Wang & Shixian Luo & Jiao Zhang & Katsunori Furuya, 2022. "Increased Attention to Smart Development in Rural Areas: A Scientometric Analysis of Smart Village Research," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-28, August.
    20. Daniela Knuth & Doris Kehl & Lynn Hulse & Silke Schmidt, 2014. "Risk Perception, Experience, and Objective Risk: A Cross‐National Study with European Emergency Survivors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1286-1298, July.

    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:17:y:2020:i:9:p:3255-:d:354816. 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.