Societal Risk Perception: A 19-Countries Comparison
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v5i2.325Keywords:
perception des risques sociétaux, différences interculturelles dans la perception des risques, analyse en clusters, couverture médiatiqueAbstract
The study was aimed at structuring the crosscountry differences in risk perception that have been reported in the literature, using cluster analysis. A 30-hazard x 19-country matrix was composed using as inputs the mean risk estimation levels available in the literature, and cluster analysis was conducted on this matrix. Six clusters of countries were found: A Communist bloc cluster (USSR and Hungary), a Nordic cluster (Finland, Norway, Sweden), an Arab cluster (Egypt and Kuwait), a Developing countries cluster (Brazil and South Korea), a Western cluster (France, Portugal, Spain, USA), and a cluster comprised of four countries or territories (Burkina Faso, China-Hong-Kong, China-Macao, Russia) which only common denominator seems to be that these countries are countries in which many economical and/or societal problems exist. The factors that may explain this clustering are discussed, and a new, more analytic approach to cross-national differences in risk perception is suggested.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Ahmed, R., Macri, D., & Mullet, E. (2006). Societal risk perception among Egyptian adolescents and adults. Journal of Northern-Africa Studies, 11, 323-334.
Ahmed, R., & Mullet, E. (2007). Societal risk perception in Arab countries: The case of Kuwait. Unpublished Manuscript.
Boholm, A. (1998). Comparative studies of risk perception: A review of twenty years of research. Journal of Risk Research, 1, 135-163.
Bouyer, M., Bagdassarian, S., Chaabane, S., & Mullet, E. (2001). Personality correlates of Risk Perception. Risk Analysis, 21, 457-465.
Brun, W. (1992). Cognitive components in risk perception: Natural versus manmade risks. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 5, 117-132.
Cha, Y.-J. (2000). Risk perception in Korea: An application of the psychometric paradigm. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 1, 42-51.
Chauvin, B., Hermand, D., & Mullet, E. (2007). Risk perception and personality facets. Risk Analysis, 27, 171-185.
Englander, T., Farago, K., Slovic, P., & Fischhoff, B. (1986). A comparative analysis of risk perception in Hungary and the United States. Social Behavior, 1, 55-66.
Finucane, M. L., & Maybery, M. T. (1996). Risk perception in Australia. Psychological Reports, 79, 1331-1338.
Goszczynska, M., Tyszka, T., & Slovic, P. (1991). Risk perception in Poland: A comparison with three other countries. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 4, 179-193.
Karpowicz-Lazreg, C., & Mullet, E. (1993). Societal risks as seen by a French public. Risk Analysis, 13, 253-258.
Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H. S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J. X., & Ratick, S. (2000). The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. In P. Slovic (Ed.), The perception of risk (pp. 232-263). London: Earthscan.
Keown, C. F. (1989). Risk perception of Hong Kongese vs. Americans. Risk Analysis, 9, 401-405.
Koné, D., & Mullet, E. (1994). Societal risk perception and media coverage. Risk Analysis, 14, 21-24.
Macri, D., & Mullet, E. (2007). Cross-national validation of an eight-factor model of societal risk perception, Journal of Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, in press.
Mechitov, A., & Rebrik, S. (1990). Studies of risk and safety perception in the USSR. In K. Borcheding, O. I. Larichev, & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Contemporary issues in decision making. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Mullet, E., Duquesnoy, C., Raiff, P., Fahrasmane, R., & Namur, E. (1993). The evaluative factor of risk perception. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1594-1605.
Mullet, E., Lazreg, C., Candela, C., & Neto, F. (2005). The Scandinavian way of perceiving societal risks. Journal of Risk Research, 8, 19-30.
Muñoz Sastre, M. T., Gatelier, S., Portell, M., Neto, F., & Mullet, E. (2006). Societal risk perception among a sample of Spanish students. Contemporary Politics and Economics of Europe, 18, 127-138.
Neto, F., & Mullet, E. (2000). Societal risk perception by the Portuguese public. European Review of Applied Psychology, 49, 155-163.
Neto, F., & Mullet, E. (2001). Societal risks as seen by Chinese students living in Macao. Journal of Risk Research, 4, 63-73.
Nyland, L. G. (1993). Risk perception in Brazil and Sweden. Stockholm: Center for Risk Research.
Rodionova, N., Vinsonneau, G., Rivière, S., & Mullet, E. (2007). Societal risk perception in present day Russia. Journal of Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, in press.
Rohrmann, B. (1994). Risk perception of different societal groups: Australian findings and cross national comparisons. Australian Journal of Psychology, 46, 150-163.
Savadori, L., Rumiati, R., & Bonini, N. (1998). Expertise and regional differences in risk perception: The case of Italy. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 57, 101-113.
Savadori, L., Rumiati, R., Bonini, N., & Pedon, A. (1998). Risk perception: Experts vs nonexperts. Archivio di Psicologia, Neurologia e Psichiatria, 59, 387-405.
Sjöberg, L. (2000). The methodology of risk perception research. Quality & Quantity, 34, 407-418.
Sjöberg, L., & Winroth, E. (1986). Risk, moral value of actions, and mood. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 27, 191-208.
Sjöberg, L., Kolarova, D., Rucai, A. A., Bernström, M. L., & Flygelholm, H. (1996). Risk perception and media reports in Bulgaria and Romania. Stockholm: Center for Risk Research.
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280-285.
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1985). Characterizing perceived risk. In R. Kates, C. Hohenemser, & J. X. Kasperson (Eds.), Perilous progress: Managing the hazards of technology (pp. 91-125). Boulder CO: Westview Press.
Teigen, K., Brun, W., & Slovic, P. (1988). Societal risk as seen by a Norwegian public. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 1, 111-130.
Ahmed, R., & Mullet, E. (2007). Societal risk perception in Arab countries: The case of Kuwait. Unpublished Manuscript.
Boholm, A. (1998). Comparative studies of risk perception: A review of twenty years of research. Journal of Risk Research, 1, 135-163.
Bouyer, M., Bagdassarian, S., Chaabane, S., & Mullet, E. (2001). Personality correlates of Risk Perception. Risk Analysis, 21, 457-465.
Brun, W. (1992). Cognitive components in risk perception: Natural versus manmade risks. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 5, 117-132.
Cha, Y.-J. (2000). Risk perception in Korea: An application of the psychometric paradigm. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 1, 42-51.
Chauvin, B., Hermand, D., & Mullet, E. (2007). Risk perception and personality facets. Risk Analysis, 27, 171-185.
Englander, T., Farago, K., Slovic, P., & Fischhoff, B. (1986). A comparative analysis of risk perception in Hungary and the United States. Social Behavior, 1, 55-66.
Finucane, M. L., & Maybery, M. T. (1996). Risk perception in Australia. Psychological Reports, 79, 1331-1338.
Goszczynska, M., Tyszka, T., & Slovic, P. (1991). Risk perception in Poland: A comparison with three other countries. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 4, 179-193.
Karpowicz-Lazreg, C., & Mullet, E. (1993). Societal risks as seen by a French public. Risk Analysis, 13, 253-258.
Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H. S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J. X., & Ratick, S. (2000). The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. In P. Slovic (Ed.), The perception of risk (pp. 232-263). London: Earthscan.
Keown, C. F. (1989). Risk perception of Hong Kongese vs. Americans. Risk Analysis, 9, 401-405.
Koné, D., & Mullet, E. (1994). Societal risk perception and media coverage. Risk Analysis, 14, 21-24.
Macri, D., & Mullet, E. (2007). Cross-national validation of an eight-factor model of societal risk perception, Journal of Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, in press.
Mechitov, A., & Rebrik, S. (1990). Studies of risk and safety perception in the USSR. In K. Borcheding, O. I. Larichev, & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Contemporary issues in decision making. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Mullet, E., Duquesnoy, C., Raiff, P., Fahrasmane, R., & Namur, E. (1993). The evaluative factor of risk perception. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1594-1605.
Mullet, E., Lazreg, C., Candela, C., & Neto, F. (2005). The Scandinavian way of perceiving societal risks. Journal of Risk Research, 8, 19-30.
Muñoz Sastre, M. T., Gatelier, S., Portell, M., Neto, F., & Mullet, E. (2006). Societal risk perception among a sample of Spanish students. Contemporary Politics and Economics of Europe, 18, 127-138.
Neto, F., & Mullet, E. (2000). Societal risk perception by the Portuguese public. European Review of Applied Psychology, 49, 155-163.
Neto, F., & Mullet, E. (2001). Societal risks as seen by Chinese students living in Macao. Journal of Risk Research, 4, 63-73.
Nyland, L. G. (1993). Risk perception in Brazil and Sweden. Stockholm: Center for Risk Research.
Rodionova, N., Vinsonneau, G., Rivière, S., & Mullet, E. (2007). Societal risk perception in present day Russia. Journal of Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, in press.
Rohrmann, B. (1994). Risk perception of different societal groups: Australian findings and cross national comparisons. Australian Journal of Psychology, 46, 150-163.
Savadori, L., Rumiati, R., & Bonini, N. (1998). Expertise and regional differences in risk perception: The case of Italy. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 57, 101-113.
Savadori, L., Rumiati, R., Bonini, N., & Pedon, A. (1998). Risk perception: Experts vs nonexperts. Archivio di Psicologia, Neurologia e Psichiatria, 59, 387-405.
Sjöberg, L. (2000). The methodology of risk perception research. Quality & Quantity, 34, 407-418.
Sjöberg, L., & Winroth, E. (1986). Risk, moral value of actions, and mood. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 27, 191-208.
Sjöberg, L., Kolarova, D., Rucai, A. A., Bernström, M. L., & Flygelholm, H. (1996). Risk perception and media reports in Bulgaria and Romania. Stockholm: Center for Risk Research.
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280-285.
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1985). Characterizing perceived risk. In R. Kates, C. Hohenemser, & J. X. Kasperson (Eds.), Perilous progress: Managing the hazards of technology (pp. 91-125). Boulder CO: Westview Press.
Teigen, K., Brun, W., & Slovic, P. (1988). Societal risk as seen by a Norwegian public. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 1, 111-130.
Downloads
Published
2020-01-20
How to Cite
Chauvin, B., Macri, D., & Mullet, E. (2020). Societal Risk Perception: A 19-Countries Comparison . Psihologia Resurselor Umane, 5(2), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v5i2.325
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).
