Abstract
Concern is mounting in Europe and North America about the low proportion of people who say they would accept a blood transfusion. For example, in the event of needing a transfusion, 46% of Europeans assert that they would accept blood from anybody, 25% would only accept blood they had donated earlier themselves, and 23% would only accept a relative or friend’s blood [1]. Similarly, a North American Survey found that only about 19% of Canadians would definitely accept a transfusion [2]. In many cases refusing a transfusion comes with higher risks to health and life than accepting it [3,4]. However, given the spate of publicity in recent decades about potentially contaminated blood, it is not surprising that perceptions of blood transfusions reflect increasing fear. Already we know much from psychological research about risk perception in general and can forecast the impact of various risk management strategies on the public’s perception of blood transfusions. Health policymakers and regulators would do well to heed warning signals indicating that problems in the blood supply (real or imagined) will have devastating impacts. Fortunately, we may be able to minimize the likelihood of making decisions that turn out to be costly in terms of economics or human lives by looking at what we know about risk perception and what it implies for acceptability of blood transfusion.
Decision Research, Eugene, Oregon.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
INRA. Eurobarometer 41.0: Europeans and blood. Prepared for the European Commission on employment, industrial relations and social affairs. Paris: Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Feb 1995.
Compas I. Perceived blood safety and transfusion acceptance. A report to the Canadian Red Cross Society on perceived safety of blood and willingness to accept a blood transfusion. Ottawa: Compas, Inc. Multi-Audience Research, Spring, 1995.
Spence R. IOM [Institute of Medicine] Blood Forum explores alternative decisionmaking and risk communications. Council of Community Blood Centers Newsletter, 1995; Jan 27:4–5.
United States General Accounting Office. Blood safety: Recalls and withdrawals of plasma products. No. GAO/T-HEHS-98–166. Washington, DC: USGAO, 1998.
Peters E, Slovic P. The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. J Appl Soc Psychol 1996;26:1427–1453.
Kraus NN, Malmfors T, Slovic P. Intuitive toxicology: Expert and lay judgments of chemical risks. Risk Anal 1992;12:215–32.
Kunreuther H, Slovic P. Science, values, and risk. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci [special issue on risk assessment and risk management]. 1996;545:116–25.
Slovic P, Malmfors T, Krewski D, Mertz CK, Neil N, Bartlett S. Intuitive toxicology II: Expert and lay judgments of chemical risks in Canada. Risk Anal 1995;15:661–75.
Kunreuther H, Easterling D, Desvousges W, Slovic P. Public attitudes toward siting a high-level nuclear waste repository in Nevada. Risk Anal 1990;10:469–84.
McDaniels TL, Axelrod LJ, Slovic P. Characterizing perception of ecological risk. Risk Anal 1995;15:575–88.
Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science 1987;236:280–85.
Englander T, Farago K, Slovic P, Fischhoff B. A comparative analysis of risk perception in Hungary and the United States. Soc Behav 1988;1:55–66.
Kleinhesselink RR, Rosa EA. Cognitive representation of risk perceptions: A comparison of Japan and the United States. J Cross-Cult Aff 1991 ;22:11–28.
Mullet E, Duquesnoy C, Raiff P, Fahrasmane R, Namur E. The evaluative factor of risk perception. J Appl Soc Psychol 1993;23:1594–605.
Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Facts and fears: Understanding perceived risk. In: Schwing RC, Albers WA Jr, eds. Societal risk assessment: How safe is safe enough? New York: Plenum, 1980:181 -216.
Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Behavioral decision theory perspectives on risk and safety. Acta Psychol 1984;56:183–203.
Teigen KH, Brun W, Slovic P. Societal risks as seen by a Norwegian public. J Behav Decis Making 1988;1:111–30.
Gregory R, Flynn J, Slovic P. Technological stigma. Amer Sci 1995;83:220–23.
Mitchell ML. The impact of external parties on brand-name capital: The 1982 Tylenol poisonings and subsequent cases. Econ Inq 1989;27:601–18.
Rosen JD. Much ado about ALAR. Issues Sci Technol 1990;71:85–90.
Burton M, Young T. Measuring meat consumers’ response to the perceived risks of BSE in Great Britain. Risk Decis Policy 1997;2:19–28.
Lanchester J. A new kind of contagion. New Yorker 1996;Dec 2:70–81.
Prusiner, S. The prion diseases. Sci Am 1995;272:47–57.
Greeley A. Concern about AIDS in minority communities. FDA Consumer 1995;29: 11–15.
Denman S, Pearson J, Davis P, Moody D. A survey of HIV- and AIDS-related knowledge, beliefs and attitudes among 14 year olds in Nottinghamshire. Educ Res 1996;38:93–99.
Gerbert B, Maguire BT, Sumser J. Public perception of risk of AIDS in health care settings. AIDS Educ Prev 1991;3:322–27.
Slovic P, Flynn JH, Layman M. Perceived risk, trust, and the politics of nuclear waste. Science 1991;254:1603–07.
Szalay LB, Deese J. Subjective meaning and culture: An assessment through word associations. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1978.
Alhakami AS, Slovic P. A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit. Risk Anal 1994;14:1085–96.
Finucane ML, Alhakami A, Slovic P, Johnson S. The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Report No. 98–7. Eugene, OR: Decision Research, 1998.
Flynn J, Slovic P, Mertz CK. Gender, race, and perception of environmental health risks. Risk Anal 1994;14:1101–08.
Slovic P. Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Anal 1993;13:675–82.
Barke R, Jenkins-Smith H, Slovic P. Risk perceptions of men and women scientists. Soc Sci Q 1997;78:167–76.
Dake K. Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk: An analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. J Cross-Cult Psychol 1991;22:61–82.
Dake K. Myths of nature: Culture and the social construction of risk. J Soc Issues 1992;48:21–27.
Picard A. The gift of death: Confronting Canada’s tainted-blood tragedy. Toronto, Ontario: HarperCollins, 1995.
Pbert LA, Goetsch VL. A multifaceted behavioral intervention for pill-taking avoidance associated with Tylenol poisoning. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry 1988; 19: 311–15.
Margolis H. Dealing with risk. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
Chan P. Blood, risk, and stigma. Paper presented at the Annenberg Conference on Risk, Media, and Stigma, Philadelphia, PA. 1997 Mar 23–24.
Interim report: Commission of Inquiry on the blood system in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: The Commission of Inquiry on the blood system in Canada, 1995.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1999 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Finucane, M.L., Slovic, P., Mertz, C.K. (1999). Bad Blood or the Elixir of Life? Perceived Risk of Blood Transfusions. In: Sibinga, C.T.S., Alter, H.J. (eds) Risk Management in Blood Transfusion: The Virtue of Reality. Developments in Hematology and Immunology, vol 34. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3009-8_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3009-8_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-4822-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-3009-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive