IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v22y2019i4p416-431.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cultural predispositions, specific affective feelings, and benefit–risk perceptions: explicating local policy elites’ perceived utility of high voltage power line installations

Author

Listed:
  • Rachael M. Moyer
  • Geoboo Song

Abstract

Policy controversies concerning the prioritized expansion of the National Energy Grid in the U.S. have drawn our attention to examine the variations of benefit–risk perceptions associated with High Voltage Power Line (HVPL) installation among policy elites, a critical conceptual segment of political actors constituting the U.S. energy policy subsystem. From early psychometric studies to more recent explorations of the emotional aspects of risk appraisal, specifying the role of affective feelings in understanding risk judgment has been a subject of much previous research. This paper seeks to advance such an affect-driven approach in an attempt to account for social psychology-based factors by systemically investigating how specific emotions and personally held intrinsic values and beliefs jointly influence individual-level perceptions of HVPL benefits and risks, relying on recent original survey data containing individual responses from 420 anonymous community leaders and key local policy-makers in the state of Arkansas. Building upon previous research rooted in the dual process model of risk judgment and appraisal tendency framework, a particular emphasis is given to identifying the triadic relationship between culturally biased value predispositions, specific emotional dimensions of affect heuristics, and perceptions pertaining to various aspects of HVPL risks and benefits. Through the implementation of the causal mediation analysis, we found that the effect of cultural value predispositions (i.e. egalitarianism, individualism, hierarchism, and fatalism) on perceived benefits and risks associated with HPVL installation among policy elites is partially mediated by specific affective feelings (i.e. fear, anger, happiness, and excitement) in very distinct ways. We conclude this paper by suggesting that a more robust understanding of the cognitive mechanism of benefit–risk perceptions, particularly those of individuals with more opportunities and resources to shape related policies, promises valuable insight for the development of more effective risk communications and better policy-making practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Rachael M. Moyer & Geoboo Song, 2019. "Cultural predispositions, specific affective feelings, and benefit–risk perceptions: explicating local policy elites’ perceived utility of high voltage power line installations," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 416-431, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:22:y:2019:i:4:p:416-431
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2017.1391317
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2017.1391317
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2017.1391317?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Matthew C. Nowlin, 2022. "Who should “do more” about climate change? Cultural theory, polycentricity, and public support for climate change actions across actors and governments," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(4), pages 468-485, July.
    2. Wenling Bao & Yu Chen & Caiyun Cui & Bo Xia & Yongjian Ke & Martin Skitmore & Yong Liu, 2023. "How to Shape Local Public Acceptance of Not-in-My-Backyard Infrastructures? A Social Cognitive Theory Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-18, November.
    3. Sarah Driessen & Lambert Bodewein & Dagmar Dechent & David Graefrath & Kristina Schmiedchen & Dominik Stunder & Thomas Kraus & Anne-Kathrin Petri, 2020. "Biological and health-related effects of weak static magnetic fields (≤ 1 mT) in humans and vertebrates: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, June.
    4. Rachael M. Moyer, 2022. "Images of controversy: Examining cognition of hydraulic fracturing among policy elites and the general public," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(4), pages 441-467, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:4:p:416-431. 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.

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