Epistemiological and Methodological aspects of Individual Risk Assessment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v5i2.324Keywords:
risks, assessment, subjective ratings, construct, mental arithmeticAbstract
In societies in which technological development has reached an advanced stage, risk assessment of all kinds is an individual and social necessity. Individual risk assessment strategies employed by "ordinary" people have certain specific epistemological and methodological characteristics that are well worth studying in order to understand how such people behave. In this paper, the author argues that risk assessment is reached by means of a complex and subjective "construct"; he goes on to analyse two distinct approaches - factorial and procedural - to the assessment process. The difficulties that arise as regards assessment are then analysed in terms of data processing. The author indicates certain relationship patterns between objective ratings (scores) and their subjective counterpart (assessment), and highlights certain - at times surprising - rules of "mental arithmetic".
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Anderson, N.H. (1996). A functional theory of cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Berger, J.O. (1980). Statistical decision theory: foundations, concepts and methods. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Bernoulli, D. (1738). Specimen theoriae novae de mensura sortis. Commentari academiae scienciarum imperialis petropolitanae, 5, 175-192. Traduction française: Revue de statistique appliquée, [1971], 19, 5-18.
Bollen, K.A. (2003). Latent variables in psychology and the social sciences. Annual review of psychology, 53, 605-634.
Cadet, B. (1999). L'évaluation du risque: une construction subjective? Risques, 39, 72-78.
Cadet, B. (2001). Traitements de l'incertitude dans l'évaluation des risques. Bulletin de psychologie, 54, 357-367.
Cadet, B. (2006). Percevoir et évaluer les risques. In D.R. Kouabenan, B. Cadet, D. Hermand & M.T. Muñoz Sastre, Psychologie du risque: identifier, évaluer, prévenir (pp. 35-60). Bruxelles: De Boeck.
Chapman, L.J. & Chapman, J.P (1969). Illusory correlation as an obstacle to the use of valid psychodiagnostic signs. Journal of abnormal
psychology, 74, 271 280.
De Finetti, B. (1972). Probability, induction and statistics: the art of guessing. New York: Wiley.
Edwards, W & Tversky, A. (1967). Decision making. Hammondsworth: Penguin Books.
Fericelli, A.M. (1978). Théorie statistique de la décision. Paris: Economica.
Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S.L. & Keeney, R.L. (1981). Acceptable risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
George, C. (1997). Article "stratégie". In: Grand dictionnaire de la psychologie. Paris: Larousse.
Griffith, R.M. (1949). Odds adjustments by american horse race betters. American journal of psychology, 62, 290-294.
Hogarth, R.M. (1980). Judgment and choice: the psychology of decision. New york: wiley.
Kahneman, D.; Slovic P. & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Kouabenan, D.R. (2006) Des facteurs structurants aux biais ou illusions dans la perception des risques. In: D.R. Kouabenan, B. Cadet, D. Hermand & M.T. Muñoz Sastre, Psychologie du risque: identifier, évaluer, prévenir (pp. 125-145). Bruxelles: De Boeck.
Llory, M. & Dien, Y. (2006). Les systèmes sociotechniques à risques. Performances, 30, 20-26.
Miller, G.A. (1956). The magic number seven plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological
review, 63, 81-93.
Rasmussen, J.; Perjtersen, A.M. & Goodstein, L.P. (1994). Cognitive systems engineering. New York: Wiley.
Savage L.J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley.
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. & Lichtenstein, S. (1979). Rating the risks. Environment, 21, 14-20.
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. & Lichtenstein, S. (1981). Perceived risk: psychological factors and social implications. Proceedings of the royal
society, London, a, 376, 17-34.
Slovic, P. (2000). The perception of risk. London: Earthscan.
Stevens, S.S. (1968). Le quantitatif et la perception. Bulletin de psychologie, 22, 696-715.
Yates, J.F. & Stone, E.R. (1992). The risk construct. In J.F. Yates (ed) Risk taking behavior (pp. 257-281). Chichester: Wiley.
Berger, J.O. (1980). Statistical decision theory: foundations, concepts and methods. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Bernoulli, D. (1738). Specimen theoriae novae de mensura sortis. Commentari academiae scienciarum imperialis petropolitanae, 5, 175-192. Traduction française: Revue de statistique appliquée, [1971], 19, 5-18.
Bollen, K.A. (2003). Latent variables in psychology and the social sciences. Annual review of psychology, 53, 605-634.
Cadet, B. (1999). L'évaluation du risque: une construction subjective? Risques, 39, 72-78.
Cadet, B. (2001). Traitements de l'incertitude dans l'évaluation des risques. Bulletin de psychologie, 54, 357-367.
Cadet, B. (2006). Percevoir et évaluer les risques. In D.R. Kouabenan, B. Cadet, D. Hermand & M.T. Muñoz Sastre, Psychologie du risque: identifier, évaluer, prévenir (pp. 35-60). Bruxelles: De Boeck.
Chapman, L.J. & Chapman, J.P (1969). Illusory correlation as an obstacle to the use of valid psychodiagnostic signs. Journal of abnormal
psychology, 74, 271 280.
De Finetti, B. (1972). Probability, induction and statistics: the art of guessing. New York: Wiley.
Edwards, W & Tversky, A. (1967). Decision making. Hammondsworth: Penguin Books.
Fericelli, A.M. (1978). Théorie statistique de la décision. Paris: Economica.
Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S.L. & Keeney, R.L. (1981). Acceptable risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
George, C. (1997). Article "stratégie". In: Grand dictionnaire de la psychologie. Paris: Larousse.
Griffith, R.M. (1949). Odds adjustments by american horse race betters. American journal of psychology, 62, 290-294.
Hogarth, R.M. (1980). Judgment and choice: the psychology of decision. New york: wiley.
Kahneman, D.; Slovic P. & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Kouabenan, D.R. (2006) Des facteurs structurants aux biais ou illusions dans la perception des risques. In: D.R. Kouabenan, B. Cadet, D. Hermand & M.T. Muñoz Sastre, Psychologie du risque: identifier, évaluer, prévenir (pp. 125-145). Bruxelles: De Boeck.
Llory, M. & Dien, Y. (2006). Les systèmes sociotechniques à risques. Performances, 30, 20-26.
Miller, G.A. (1956). The magic number seven plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological
review, 63, 81-93.
Rasmussen, J.; Perjtersen, A.M. & Goodstein, L.P. (1994). Cognitive systems engineering. New York: Wiley.
Savage L.J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley.
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. & Lichtenstein, S. (1979). Rating the risks. Environment, 21, 14-20.
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. & Lichtenstein, S. (1981). Perceived risk: psychological factors and social implications. Proceedings of the royal
society, London, a, 376, 17-34.
Slovic, P. (2000). The perception of risk. London: Earthscan.
Stevens, S.S. (1968). Le quantitatif et la perception. Bulletin de psychologie, 22, 696-715.
Yates, J.F. & Stone, E.R. (1992). The risk construct. In J.F. Yates (ed) Risk taking behavior (pp. 257-281). Chichester: Wiley.
Downloads
Published
2020-01-20
How to Cite
Cadet, B. (2020). Epistemiological and Methodological aspects of Individual Risk Assessment. Psihologia Resurselor Umane, 5(2), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v5i2.324
Issue
Section
Research articles
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal,it also allows for use of the work for non-commercial purposes and if others remix, transform or build upon the works found in this journal they must distribute the contributions under the same licence as the original.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See: The Effect of Open Access).
