Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding and Communicating Risk: A Psychological Overview

  • Conference paper
Safety-Critical Systems: The Convergence of High Tech and Human Factors

  • 62 Accesses

Abstract

Risk is an inescapable fact of life. We are all confronted by risks; we all have to take risks whether we like it or not — whether we even know it or not. Although there has been a considerable effort to understand how — and how well — people react to threats there are still many unresolved arguments and uncertainties about the nature of risk. How should risk be defined? How should uncertain threats be classified and responded to? How do people intuitively construe risk? This paper does not provide any definitive answers to these questions but offers a précis of some of the research that has offered illuminating or provocative insights.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baron, J. Nonconsequentialist Decisions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1994; 17: 1–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bostrom, A., Morgan, M.G. and Fischhoff, B. Characterizing mental models of hazardous processes: A methodology and an application to Radon. Journal of Social Issues 1992; 45: 85–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Brun, W. Risk perception: Main issues, approaches and findings. In Wright, G. and Ayton, P (Eds.), Subjective Probability. Chichester: Wiley, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Carlo, G.L., Lee, NX., Sund, K.G. and Pettygrove, S.D. The interplay of science, values and experiences among scientists asked to evaluate the hazards of Dioxin, Radon and Environmental Tobacco Smoke. Risk Analysis 1992; 12: 37–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Edwards, W. The prediction of decisions among bets. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1955; 50: 201–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Edwards, W. Utility theories: measurements and applications. Studies in Risk and Uncertainty. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fischhoff, B. Managing risk perceptions. Issues in Science and Technology 1985; 2: 83–96.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Funtowicz, S.O. and Ravetz, J.R. Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1990.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Grabowski, H. and Vernon, J. The regulation of Pharmaceuticals. Washington D.C.: American Enterprise Institute, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Johnson, B.B. and Covello, V.T. (Eds) The Social and Cultural Construction of Risk. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica 1979; 47: 263–291.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981; 211: 453–458.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. and Tversky, A. (Eds), Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kraus, N., Malmfors, T. and Slovic, P. Intuitive Toxicology: Expert and lay judgements of chemical risk. Risk Analysis 1992; 12: 215–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Layfield, Sir Frank. Sizewell B Public Inquiry: Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations. London: H.M.S.O., 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lichtenstein, S. and Slovic, P. Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1971; 89: 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lichtenstein, S. and Slovic, P. Response-induced reversals of preference in gambling: An extended replication in Las Vegas. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1973; 101: 16–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P. and Zinc, D. Effect of instruction in expected value on optimality in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 79, 236–240.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lopes, L. Risk and distributional inequality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1984; 10: 465–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lopes, L. Between hope and fear: The psychology of risk. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 1987; 20: 255–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. McNeil, B.J., Pauker, S.G., Sox, H.E. and Tversky, A. On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. New England Journal of Medicine 1982; 306: 1259–1262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mitchell, J.V. Perception of risk and credibility at toxic sites. Risk Analysis 1992; 12: 19–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pidgeon, N., Hood, C, Jones, D. and Turner, B. Risk Perception. In Risk Assessment. London: The Royal Society, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rohrmann, B. The evaluation of risk communication effectiveness. Acta Psychologica 1992; 81: 169–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Samuelson, W. and Zeckhauser, R. Status-quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1988; 1: 7–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Slovic, P. Psychological study of human judgement: implications for investment decision making. Journal of Finance 1972; 27: 779–799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Slovic, P. Facts vs. fears: Understanding perceived risk. Paper presented to the National Science Foundation, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. and Lichtenstein, S. Facts versus fears: Understanding perceived risk. In Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. and Tversky, A. (Eds), Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Smithson, M. Ignorance and Uncertainty. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1989.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  30. Tversky, A. Sattath, S. and Slovic, P. Contingent weighting in judgement and choice. Psychological Review 1988; 95: 371–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Vesely, W.E. and Rasmussen, D.M. Uncertainties in nuclear probabilistic risk analysis. Risk Analysis 1984; 4: 313–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Viscusi, W.K., Magat, W.A. and Huber, J. Rand Journal of Economics 1987; 18: 465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Vlek, C. and Keren, G. Behavioral Decision Theory and Environmental Risk Management: What have we learned and what has been neglected? Paper presented at 13th Research Conference on Subjective Probability, Utility and Decision Making Fribourg (Sw), 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Weinstein, N.D. Attitudes of the public and the department of Environmental Protection toward environmental hazard. New Jersey Department of Health Protection, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Yates, J.F. and Stone, E.R. The risk construct. In. Yates, J.F. (Ed) Risk Taking behavior. Chichester: Wiley, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Zeckhauser, R.J. and Viscusi, W.K. Risk within reason. Science 1990; 248: 559–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, City University, London, UK

    Peter Ayton & David K. Hardman

Authors
  1. Peter Ayton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David K. Hardman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Redmill Consultancy, 22 Onslow Gardens, London, N10 3JU, UK

    Felix Redmill

  2. Centre for Software Reliability, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK

    Tom Anderson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1996 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this paper

Cite this paper

Ayton, P., Hardman, D.K. (1996). Understanding and Communicating Risk: A Psychological Overview. In: Redmill, F., Anderson, T. (eds) Safety-Critical Systems: The Convergence of High Tech and Human Factors. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-1480-2_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-1480-2_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-76009-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-1480-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation