IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v48y2014i1p91-110.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conditional respect towards the pedestrian: difference between men and women and risk modeling by the Bayesian approach

Author

Listed:
  • Sandrine Gaymard
  • Teodor Tiplica

Abstract

Research in the field of social representations and of norm conditionality has enabled the construction of specific tools such as the conditional script questionnaire (CSQ) and the use of various methods of analysis. The first aim of this study is to show the differences of conditionality between male and female drivers toward pedestrians. To test this hypothesis, a version of the CSQ has been fitted to the pedestrian. We show that conditionality toward the pedestrian is more significant for men in certain specific situations and we highlight that women are more aware of the vulnerability of pedestrians. The second stage is aimed at improving knowledge between conditionality and risk taking, by using Bayes’ theorem for the first time. It is demonstrated that a Bayesian network based on the CSQ can be built in order to model the perception of hazardous situations. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Sandrine Gaymard & Teodor Tiplica, 2014. "Conditional respect towards the pedestrian: difference between men and women and risk modeling by the Bayesian approach," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 91-110, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:48:y:2014:i:1:p:91-110
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-012-9751-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-012-9751-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-012-9751-y?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. Terre A. Satterfield & C. K. Mertz & Paul Slovic, 2004. "Discrimination, Vulnerability, and Justice in the Face of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(1), pages 115-129, February.
    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. Mercedes Camarero, 2021. "Risk and Vulnerability Differences Across the European Union Based on an Accidental-Injury Proneness Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 157(1), pages 335-360, August.

    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. Govindan, Mini & Ram Mohan, M.P., 2021. "Exploring Gender Perceptions of Nuclear Energy in India," IIMA Working Papers WP 2021-11-06, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    2. Winkler, Harald & Baumert, Kevin & Blanchard, Odile & Burch, Sarah & Robinson, John, 2007. "What factors influence mitigative capacity?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 692-703, January.
    3. Morioka, Rika, 2014. "Gender difference in the health risk perception of radiation from Fukushima in Japan: The role of hegemonic masculinity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 105-112.
    4. William Donner, 2007. "The political ecology of disaster: An analysis of factors influencing U.S. tornado fatalities and injuries, 1998–2000," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 44(3), pages 669-685, August.
    5. Daniela Acquadro Maran & Tatiana Begotti, 2021. "Media Exposure to Climate Change, Anxiety, and Efficacy Beliefs in a Sample of Italian University Students," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-11, September.
    6. McAuliffe, Sarah & Potts, Jonathan & Canessa, Rosaline & Baily, Brian, 2014. "Establishing attitudes and perceptions of recreational boat users based in the River Hamble Estuary, UK, towards Marine Conservation Zones," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 98-107.
    7. Branden B. Johnson, 2012. "Experience with Urban Air Pollution in Paterson, New Jersey and Implications for Air Pollution Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(1), pages 39-53, January.
    8. Jagadish Thaker & Nicholas Smith & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2020. "Global Warming Risk Perceptions in India," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(12), pages 2481-2497, December.
    9. Ahmad Saleh Safi & William James Smith & Zhnongwei Liu, 2012. "Rural Nevada and Climate Change: Vulnerability, Beliefs, and Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(6), pages 1041-1059, June.
    10. Matthew H. Goldberg & Abel Gustafson & Matthew T. Ballew & Seth A. Rosenthal & Matthew J. Cutler & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2020. "Predictors of global warming risk perceptions among Latino and non-Latino White Americans," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 1555-1574, October.
    11. Louisa S Evans & Christina C Hicks & W Neil Adger & Jon Barnett & Allison L Perry & Pedro Fidelman & Renae Tobin, 2016. "Structural and Psycho-Social Limits to Climate Change Adaptation in the Great Barrier Reef Region," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, March.
    12. Andersson-Hudson, Jessica & Knight, William & Humphrey, Mathew & O’Hara, Sarah, 2016. "Exploring support for shale gas extraction in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 582-589.
    13. Julia M. Pearce & Lasse Lindekilde & David Parker & M. Brooke Rogers, 2019. "Communicating with the Public About Marauding Terrorist Firearms Attacks: Results from a Survey Experiment on Factors Influencing Intention to “Run, Hide, Tell” in the United Kingdom and Denmark," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(8), pages 1675-1694, August.
    14. Christopher Raymond & Gregory Brown, 2011. "Assessing spatial associations between perceptions of landscape value and climate change risk for use in climate change planning," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 653-678, February.
    15. Elizabeth A Albright & Deserai Crow, 2019. "Beliefs about climate change in the aftermath of extreme flooding," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 1-17, July.
    16. Brisbois, Benjamin, 2016. "Bananas, pesticides and health in southwestern Ecuador: A scalar narrative approach to targeting public health responses," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 184-191.
    17. Gabrielle Linscott & Andrea Rishworth & Brian King & Mikael P. Hiestand, 2022. "Uneven experiences of urban flooding: examining the 2010 Nashville flood," 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. 110(1), pages 629-653, January.
    18. Seol-A Kwon & Seoyong Kim & Jae Eun Lee, 2019. "Analyzing the Determinants of Individual Action on Climate Change by Specifying the Roles of Six Values in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-24, March.
    19. Justin Pence & Ian Miller & Tatsuya Sakurahara & James Whitacre & Seyed Reihani & Ernie Kee & Zahra Mohaghegh, 2019. "GIS‐Based Integration of Social Vulnerability and Level 3 Probabilistic Risk Assessment to Advance Emergency Preparedness, Planning, and Response for Severe Nuclear Power Plant Accidents," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(6), pages 1262-1280, June.
    20. Joseph Conti & Terre Satterfield & Barbara Herr Harthorn, 2011. "Vulnerability and Social Justice as Factors in Emergent U.S. Nanotechnology Risk Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(11), pages 1734-1748, November.

    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:spr:qualqt:v:48:y:2014:i:1:p:91-110. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.