IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v31y2011i2p312-323.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predictors of Parental Risk Perceptions: The Case of Child Pedestrian Injuries in School Context

Author

Listed:
  • Marie‐Soleil Cloutier
  • Jacques Bergeron
  • Philippe Apparicio

Abstract

The objective of this article is to explore the factors that influence parental risk perceptions of child pedestrian injuries in the elementary school context. Parents (n= 193) from six different schools responded to a questionnaire on road safety, including a measure of their risk perception. Results of bivariate analyses show that eight variables are significantly related to risk perception. Environmental variables, as we measure them, were not significant, contrary to our initial hypotheses. Only three variables, parent's gender, perceived primary source of danger, and sense of control remained significant in OLS regression analyses (adjusted R2 of 0.16, F= 9.27; p= 0.00). Since parents’ perceptions of road risks are an important factor in their road safety practices and in their choice of transportation mode used for their child's journey to school, our analysis elucidates factors underlying these choices. Our results can help decisionmakers to design traffic injury prevention measures and to promote physical activity through the use of active modes of transport.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie‐Soleil Cloutier & Jacques Bergeron & Philippe Apparicio, 2011. "Predictors of Parental Risk Perceptions: The Case of Child Pedestrian Injuries in School Context," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(2), pages 312-323, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:2:p:312-323
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01501.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01501.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01501.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pampalon, Robert & Duncan, Craig & Subramanian, S.V & Jones, Kelvyn, 1999. "Geographies of health perception in Québec: a multilevel perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 48(10), pages 1483-1490, May.
    2. Lennart Sjöberg, 2000. "Factors in Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    3. Anders A F Wahlberg & Lennart Sjoberg, 2000. "Risk perception and the media," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 31-50, January.
    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. Jennifer D. Roberts & Sandra Mandic & Craig S. Fryer & Micah L. Brachman & Rashawn Ray, 2019. "Between Privilege and Oppression: An Intersectional Analysis of Active Transportation Experiences Among Washington D.C. Area Youth," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Jennifer D. Roberts & Ming Hu & Brit Irene Saksvig & Micah L. Brachman & Casey P. Durand, 2018. "Examining the Influence of a New Light Rail Line on the Health of a Demographically Diverse and Understudied Population within the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Area: A Protocol for a Natural Experime," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-15, February.

    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. Andreea Hancu-Budui & Ana Zorio-Grima & Jose Blanco-Vega, 2020. "Audit Institutions in the European Union: Public Service Promotion, Environmental Engagement and COVID Crisis Communication through Social Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-32, November.
    2. Soohee Kim, 2022. "The Influence of SNS on Policy Support to Mitigate Public Health Crises: The Mediating Role of General and Personal Risk Perceptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-16, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Michalis Diakakis & Dimitris G. Damigos & Andreas Kallioras, 2020. "Identification of Patterns and Influential Factors on Civil Protection Personnel Opinions and Views on Different Aspects of Flood Risk Management: The Case of Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-20, July.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:3:p:513-546 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Hye Kyung Kim & Yungwook Kim, 2019. "Risk Information Seeking and Processing About Particulate Air Pollution in South Korea: The Roles of Cultural Worldview," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(5), pages 1071-1087, May.
    7. B. J. M. Ale, 2005. "Tolerable or Acceptable: A Comparison of Risk Regulation in the United Kingdom and in the Netherlands," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 231-241, April.
    8. Tianlong Yu & Hao Yang & Xiaowei Luo & Yifeng Jiang & Xiang Wu & Jingqi Gao, 2021. "Scientometric Analysis of Disaster Risk Perception: 2000–2020," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-19, December.
    9. S. A. Mashi & A. I. Inkani & Oghenejeabor Obaro & A. S. Asanarimam, 2020. "Community perception, response and adaptation strategies towards flood risk in a traditional African city," 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. 103(2), pages 1727-1759, September.
    10. Yang, Ya Ling, 2020. "Comparison of public perception and risk management decisions of aircraft noise near Taoyuan and Kaohsiung International Airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    11. aus dem Moore, Nils & Brehm, Johannes & Breidenbach, Philipp & Ghosh, Arijit & Gruhl, Henri, 2022. "Flood risk perception after indirect flooding experience: Null results in the German housing market," Ruhr Economic Papers 976, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    12. Jantsje M. Mol & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Julia E. Blasch & Hans de Moel, 2020. "Insights into Flood Risk Misperceptions of Homeowners in the Dutch River Delta," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(7), pages 1450-1468, July.
    13. Zeynep Altinay & Eric Rittmeyer & Lauren L. Morris & Margaret A. Reams, 2021. "Public risk salience of sea level rise in Louisiana, United States," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(4), pages 523-536, December.
    14. Henry H. Willis & Michael L. DeKay & Baruch Fischhoff & M. Granger Morgan, 2005. "Aggregate, Disaggregate, and Hybrid Analyses of Ecological Risk Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 405-428, April.
    15. Hannah Eboh & Courtney Gallaher & Thomas Pingel & Walker Ashley, 2021. "Risk perception in small island developing states: a case study in the Commonwealth of Dominica," 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. 105(1), pages 889-914, January.
    16. Fernando Olivares-Delgado & Patricia P. Iglesias-Sánchez & María Teresa Benlloch-Osuna & Carlos de las Heras-Pedrosa & Carmen Jambrino-Maldonado, 2020. "Resilience and Anti-Stress during COVID-19 Isolation in Spain: An Analysis through Audiovisual Spots," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-23, November.
    17. Mei‐Chih Meg Tseng & Yi‐Ping Lin & Fu‐Chang Hu & Tsun‐Jen Cheng, 2013. "Risks Perception of Electromagnetic Fields in Taiwan: The Influence of Psychopathology and the Degree of Sensitivity to Electromagnetic Fields," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(11), pages 2002-2012, November.
    18. Nina Veflen & Joachim Scholderer & Solveig Langsrud, 2020. "Situated Food Safety Risk and the Influence of Social Norms," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(5), pages 1092-1110, May.
    19. Mathew P. White & J. Richard Eiser & Peter R. Harris & Sabine Pahl, 2007. "Who Reaps the Benefits, Who Bears the Risks? Comparative Optimism, Comparative Utility, and Regulatory Preferences for Mobile Phone Technology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 741-753, June.
    20. Hope, Aimie L.B. & Jones, Christopher R., 2014. "The impact of religious faith on attitudes to environmental issues and Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies: A mixed methods study," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 48-59.
    21. Garrett C. Waycaster & Taiki Matsumura & Volodymyr Bilotkach & Raphael T. Haftka & Nam H. Kim, 2018. "Review of Regulatory Emphasis on Transportation Safety in the United States, 2002–2009: Public versus Private Modes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 1085-1101, May.

    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:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:2:p:312-323. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.