Abstract
People respond to the hazards they perceive. If their perceptions are faulty, efforts at public and environmental protection are likely to be misdirected. In order to improve hazard management, a risk assessment industry has developed over the last decade which combines the efforts of physical, biological, and social scientists in an attempt to identify hazards and measure the frequency and magnitude of their consequences (1).
Reprinted by permission from Environmnent, vol. 21 (April 1979)
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
C.H. Green, “Risk: Attitudes and Beliefs,” in Behavior in Fires, ed. D.V. Canter (Wiley, New York, in press)
R.W. Kates, Risk Assessment of Environmental Hazard (Wiley, New York, 1978)
H.J. Otway, D. Maurer, and K. Thomas. “Nuclear Power: The Question of Public Acceptance,” Futures, 10 (April, 1978), 109–118.
A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, “Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, ” Science, 185 (1974), 1124–1131.
A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, “Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability,” Cognitive Psychology, 4 (1973), 207–232.
S. Lichtenstein, P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff, M. Layman, and B. Combs, “Judged Frequency of Lethal Events. ” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4 (1978), 551–578.
B. Fischhoff, P. Slovic, and S. Lichtenstein, “Fault Trees: Sensitivity of Estimated Failure Probabilities to Problem Representation, ” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4 (1978), 342–355.
B. Fischhoff, P. Slovic, and S. Lichtenstein, “Knowing with Certainty: The Appropriateness of Extreme Confidence, ” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3 (1977), 552–564.
S. Lichtenstein, B. Fischhoff, and L.D. Phillips, “Calibration of Probabilities: The State of the Art,” Decision Making and Change in Human Affairs, ed. H. Jungermann and G. de Zeeuw ( D. Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1977 ).
M. Hynes and E. Vanmarcke, “Reliability of Embankment Performance Predictions,” Proceedings of the ASCE Engineering Mechanics Division Specialty Conference ( University of Waterloo Press, Waterloo, Ont., 1976 ).
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Reactor Safety Study: An Assessment of Accident Risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants (WASH-1400, NUREG-75/014); Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 1975.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Risk Assessment Review Group. Risk Assessment Review Group Report to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NUREG/CR-0400; Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Washington. DC. 1978 ).
U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Government Operations, Subcommittee on Conservation, Energy, and Natural Resources. Teton Dam Disaster: Hearings… (94th Cong., 2d sess.; Government Printing Office. Washington. DC. 1976 ).
R.W. Kates. Hazard and Choice Perception in Flood Plain Management (Research Paper. 78; Department of Geography. University of Chicago. Chicago. IL. 1962 ).
K. Borch. The Economics of Uncertainty (Princeton University Press. Princeton. NJ, 1968 ).
Doubts Linger on Cyclamate Risks.” Eugene Register-Guard. 14 January 1976.
E.E. David, “One-Armed Scientists?,” Science, 189 (1975) 891.
B. Fischhoff, P. Slovic. S. Lichtenstein. S. Read, and B. Combs. “How Safe is Safe Enough? A Psychometric Study of Attitudes towards Technological Risks and Benefits,” Policy Sciences. 8 (1978), 127–152; P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff, and S. Lichtenstein, “Expressed Preferences,” unpublished manuscript ( Decision Research, Eugene, OR, 1978 ).
The correlations between perceived risk and the annual frequencies of death were.92 for the experts and.62,.50, and.56 for the League of Women Voters, students, and Active Club samples, respectively.
W. Lowrance. Of Acceptable Risk ( William Kaufman. Los Altos, CA. 1976 ).
The multiple correlation between the risk judgments of the LOWV members and students and a linear combination of their fatality estimates, disaster multipliers, dread ratings, and severity ratings was.95.
A secondary finding was that both experts and lay persons believed that the risks from most of the activities were better known to science than to the individuals at risk. The experts believed that the discrepancy in knowledge was particularly great for vaccinations. X-rays, antibiotics, alcohol, and home appliances. The only activities whose risks were judged better known to those exposed were mountain climbing, fire fighting, hunting, skiing, and police work.
L. Ross. “The Intuitive Psychologist and His Shortcomings.” Advances in Social Psychology, ed. L. Berkowitz ( Academic Press. New York. NY. 1977 ).
A.E. Green and A.J. Bourne, Reliability Technology (Wiley Interscience. New York. NY. 1972 ).
D. Nelkin. “The Role of Experts on a Nuclear Siting Controversy.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 30 (1974). 29–36.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1985 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S. (1985). Rating the Risks: The Structure Of Expert And Lay Perceptions. In: Covello, V.T., Mumpower, J.L., Stallen, P.J.M., Uppuluri, V.R.R. (eds) Environmental Impact Assessment, Technology Assessment, and Risk Analysis. NATO ASI Series, vol 4. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-70634-9_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-70634-9_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-70636-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-70634-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive