IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v3y2000i2p167-179.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research Note: Extending the application of the psychometric approach for assessing public perceptions of food risk: some methodological considerations

Author

Listed:
  • Chris Fife-Schaw
  • Gene Rowe

Abstract

The 'psychometric approach' to the study of public perceptions of hazards has largely been limited to describing and exploring patterns of perception using cross-sectional survey data. This article discusses a number of methodological issues that need to be considered prior to employing this approach in studies monitoring changes in perceptions, the impact of risk communications, differences between groups, and other potentially more informative applications. Drawing on data from a cohort-sequential UK survey, this article considers item presentation order, sample conditioning, reliability and validity in an investigation ofpublic perceptions of food-related hazards. The data suggest that item presentation order has a major effect on ratings- in particular ratings of hazard familiarity and there is evidence that this is in part due to anchoring effects. The findings suggest that the approach produces an acceptable level of test-retest reliability and validity and they replicate previous research in this area (e.g. Sparks and Shepherd, 1994). The data also reveal how public perceptions of the BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) hazard changed during the course of the UK crisis on just one of the two principal judgemental dimensions with BSE being perceived as significantly more dreaded but no less familiar. The implications are discussed in the context of general hazard/risk perception research.

Suggested Citation

  • Chris Fife-Schaw & Gene Rowe, 2000. "Research Note: Extending the application of the psychometric approach for assessing public perceptions of food risk: some methodological considerations," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 167-179.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:3:y:2000:i:2:p:167-179
    DOI: 10.1080/136698700376653
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/136698700376653
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/136698700376653?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. Nicolás C. Bronfman & Luis Abdón Cifuentes & Michael L. deKay & Henry H. Willis, 2007. "Accounting for Variation in the Explanatory Power of the Psychometric Paradigm: The Effects of Aggregation and Focus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 527-554, June.
    2. Houghton, J.R. & Rowe, G. & Frewer, L.J. & Van Kleef, E. & Chryssochoidis, G. & Kehagia, O. & Korzen-Bohr, S. & Lassen, J. & Pfenning, U. & Strada, A., 2008. "The quality of food risk management in Europe: Perspectives and priorities," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 13-26, February.
    3. Yeo, Sara K. & Cacciatore, Michael A. & Brossard, Dominique & Scheufele, Dietram A. & Runge, Kristin & Su, Leona Y. & Kim, Jiyoun & Xenos, Michael & Corley, Elizabeth A., 2014. "Partisan amplification of risk: American perceptions of nuclear energy risk in the wake of the Fukushima Daiichi disaster," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 727-736.
    4. Melanie Connor & Michael Siegrist, 2016. "The stability of risk and benefit perceptions: a longitudinal study assessing the perception of biotechnology," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 461-475, April.
    5. Cembalo, Luigi & Cicia, Gianni & Verneau, Fabio, 2009. "How to Improve Risk Perception Evaluation in Food Safety: A Psychometric Approach," 2009 International European Forum, February 15-20, 2009, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 59193, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    6. Lynn J. Frewer & Susan Miles & Roy Marsh, 2002. "The Media and Genetically Modified Foods: Evidence in Support of Social Amplification of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 701-711, August.
    7. 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.
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:1:y:2006:i::p:91-97 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Juliana Martins Ruzante & Valerie J. Davidson & Julie Caswell & Aamir Fazil & John A. L. Cranfield & Spencer J. Henson & Sven M. Anders & Claudia Schmidt & Jeffrey M. Farber, 2010. "A Multifactorial Risk Prioritization Framework for Foodborne Pathogens," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 724-742, May.
    10. Mahmaod Alrawad & Abdalwali Lutfi & Mohammed Amin Almaiah & Adi Alsyouf & Hussin Mostafa Arafa & Yasser Soliman & Ibrahim A. Elshaer, 2023. "A Novel Framework of Public Risk Assessment Using an Integrated Approach Based on AHP and Psychometric Paradigm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-17, June.
    11. Spencer Henson & Mamane Annou & John Cranfield & Joanne Ryks, 2008. "Understanding Consumer Attitudes Toward Food Technologies in Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1601-1617, December.
    12. Arnout R. H. Fischer & Aarieke E. I. De Jong & Rob De Jonge & Lynn J. Frewer & Maarten J. Nauta, 2005. "Improving Food Safety in the Domestic Environment: The Need for a Transdisciplinary Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(3), pages 503-517, June.
    13. Arnout R. H. Fischer & Lynn J. Frewer & Maarten J. Nauta, 2006. "Toward Improving Food Safety in the Domestic Environment: A Multi‐Item Rasch Scale for the Measurement of the Safety Efficacy of Domestic Food‐Handling Practices," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1323-1338, October.
    14. Michel Setbon & Jocelyn Raude & Claude Fischler & Antoine Flahault, 2005. "Risk Perception of the “Mad Cow Disease” in France: Determinants and Consequences," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(4), pages 813-826, August.
    15. Paul Rozin, 2006. "Naturalness judgments by lay Americans: Process dominates content in judgments of food or water acceptability and naturalness," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 1, pages 91-97, November.

    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:3:y:2000:i:2:p:167-179. 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.