Author
Listed:
- Abdul-Akeem Sadiq
- Kevin Tharp
- John D. Graham
- Jenna Tyler
Abstract
Researchers have extensively studied risk perceptions of hazardous activities and technologies to better understand how to analyze risk to inform and improve risk communications and risk management policy-making in various facets of society. Despite the existence of such studies, there is limited research on how stable or different risk perceptions of various activities and technologies are across time. A better understanding of the temporal aspect of risk perceptions can lead to more effective policy responses by ensuring that policies based on risk perceptions continuously reflect current public risk perceptions. Hence, the purpose of this descriptive study is to explore the question: ‘How stable or different are risk perceptions of hazardous activities and technologies over time?’ To answer this question, this study compares the risk rankings for 29 hazardous activities (e.g. smoking cigarettes) and technologies (e.g. driving a motor vehicle) from a risk perception survey of 2008 U.S. employees conducted in 2014 with similar 29 items from Slovic to his colleagues’ 1976/1977 survey. Specifically, we use Spearman’s rank order correlation to compare the risk rankings by Slovic and his colleagues’ three lay groups – League of Women Voters, college students, and active club members – with the risk rankings by similar lay groups from the Pacific Region in the 2014 survey. In general, the results of this descriptive study indicate some stability of risk perception over time, but some interesting differences remain. This study concludes by suggesting future research topic areas on risk perceptions of hazardous activities and technologies.
Suggested Citation
Abdul-Akeem Sadiq & Kevin Tharp & John D. Graham & Jenna Tyler, 2019.
"Temporal stability and changes in risk perception rankings of hazardous activities and technologies,"
Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 93-109, January.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:22:y:2019:i:1:p:93-109
DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2017.1351474
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:taf:jriskr:v:22:y:2019:i:1:p:93-109. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.