How Does the General Public Evaluate Risk Information? The Impact of Associations with Other Risks

There is a considerable body of knowledge about the way people perceive risks using heuristics and qualitative characteristics, and about how risk information should be communicated to the public. However, little is known about the way people use the perception of known risks (associated risks) to judge an unknown risk. In a first, qualitative study, six different risks were discussed in in-depth interviews and focus group interviews. The interviews showed that risk associations played a prominent role in forming risk perceptions. Associated risks were often mentioned spontaneously. Second, a survey study was conducted to confirm the importance of risk associations quantitatively. This study investigated whether people related unknown risks to known risks. This was indeed confirmed. Furthermore, some insight was gained into how and why people form risk associations. Results showed that the semantic category of the unknown risks was more important in forming associations than the perceived level of risk or specific risk characteristics. These findings were in line with the semantic network theory. Based on these two studies, we recommend using the mental models approach in developing new risk communications.     

What's Time Got to Do with It? Inattention to Duration in Interpretation of Survival Graphs

Reports of randomized clinical trials often use survival curves to summarize clinical outcomes over time and graphically demonstrate evidence of treatment effectiveness. Survival curves can also be used in patient communications to display how health risks accumulate over time. In a randomized survey experiment, administered online, we tested whether people viewing survival curves appropriately adjust their risk perceptions to account for the duration shown. Internet users (N= 864) were recruited from a demographically balanced U.S. panel. Participants read about a hypothetical disease and then viewed one of four survival graphs that displayed mortality risks with and without treatment. Survival graphs showed either a visually large or visually small difference between treatments and were labeled to represent either 5-year or 15-year risk statistics. Participants then provided ratings of disease seriousness, as well as treatment effectiveness for each possible treatment. Variations in ratings corresponded more with visual dissimilarity than with changes in the statistical risk exhibited, with participants perceiving somewhat greater disease seriousness and significant differences in treatment effectiveness in large visual difference graphs. We conclude that when people interpret survival curves, they often fail to sufficiently account for the timeframe represented and perceive more risk and larger differences when identical risks are displayed over longer periods of time. We recommend that all presentations of survival graphics, whether to patients, physicians, or scientists, emphasize duration information (e.g., in the title) and remind readers that attending to graph axis labels is the only way to pierce these visual illusions.     

Mental Models in Risk Assessment: Informing People About Drugs

One way to communicate about the risks of drugs is through the use of package inserts. The problems associated with this medium of informing patients have been investigated by several researchers who found that people require information about drugs they are using, including extensive risk information, and that they are willing to take this information into account in their usage of drugs. But empirical results also show that people easily misinterpret the information given. A conceptual framework is proposed that might be used for better understanding the cognitive processes involved in such a type of risk assessment and communication. It is based on the idea that people develop, through experience, a mental model of how a drug works, which effects it might produce, that contraindications have to be considered, etc. This mental model is "run" when a specific package insert has been read and a specific question arises such as, for example, whether certain symptoms can be explained as normal or whether they require special attention and action. We argue that the mental model approach offers a useful perspective for examining how people understand package inserts, and consequently for improving their content and design. The approach promises to be equally useful for other aspects of risk analysis that are dependent upon human judgment and decision making, e.g., threat diagnosis and human reliability analysis.     

“Know What to Do If You Encounter a Flash Flood”: Mental Models Analysis for Improving Flash Flood Risk Communication and Public Decision Making

Understanding how people view flash flood risks can help improve risk communication, ultimately improving outcomes. This article analyzes data from 26 mental models interviews about flash floods with members of the public in Boulder, Colorado, to understand their perspectives on flash flood risks and mitigation. The analysis includes a comparison between public and professional perspectives by referencing a companion mental models study of Boulder‐area professionals. A mental models approach can help to diagnose what people already know about flash flood risks and responses, as well as any critical gaps in their knowledge that might be addressed through improved risk communication. A few public interviewees mentioned most of the key concepts discussed by professionals as important for flash flood warning decision making. However, most interviewees exhibited some incomplete understandings and misconceptions about aspects of flash flood development and exposure, effects, or mitigation that may lead to ineffective warning decisions when a flash flood threatens. These include important misunderstandings about the rapid evolution of flash floods, the speed of water in flash floods, the locations and times that pose the greatest flash flood risk in Boulder, the value of situational awareness and environmental cues, and the most appropriate responses when a flash flood threatens. The findings point to recommendations for ways to improve risk communication, over the long term and when an event threatens, to help people quickly recognize and understand threats, obtain needed information, and make informed decisions in complex, rapidly evolving extreme weather events such as flash floods.     

Priorities in Information Desire about Unknown Risks

Research on risk perception aims to explain how people perceive risks in order to better communicate about them. Most of this research has tended to view people as passive risk perceivers. However, if confronted with an unknown risk, people can also actively seek information. The main purpose of this study was to investigate what kind of risk information people desire when confronted with an unknown risk and how this desire for information relates to the main dimensions underlying risk perception. Nine focus-group interviews were conducted. The main results of the focus groups were backed up by a paper-and-pencil questionnaire that was distributed among a random sample of 500 households in the Netherlands. Overall, people desire information with which they can determine the personal relevance of the risk confronting them. This pattern is similar to appraisal steps described by health behavior models. The focus-group results provide a dynamic picture of the way risk aspects might interact to create a final risk judgment.     

Protective Responses to Household Risk: A Case Study of Radon Mitigation

This study analyzes the effectiveness of a mass-media radon information and testing campaign conducted in the Washington, D.C. area in the winter of 1988. Although an impressive number of test kits (approximately 100,000) were sold, the ultimate mitigation rates resulting from the campaign were extremely low. Analyses show that low mitigation rates cannot be explained by postulating that people's responses to radon are insensitive to the level of objective risk. They may instead be due to characteristics of the protective response required to reduce radon risk. Radon may be thought of as one of a family of household risks which have risk response profiles that make them particularly difficult for people to manage and remediate. Traditional information campaigns for such risks are likely to be ineffective; instead, they may require regulatory strategies or programs which provide active guidance and assistance.     

Improving Risk Management: From Lame Excuses to Principled Practice

The three classic pillars of risk analysis are risk assessment (how big is the risk and how sure can we be?), risk management (what shall we do about it?), and risk communication (what shall we say about it, to whom, when, and how?). We propose two complements as important parts of these three bases: risk attribution (who or what addressable conditions actually caused an accident or loss?) and learning from experience about risk reduction (what works, and how well?). Failures in complex systems usually evoke blame, often with insufficient attention to root causes of failure, including some aspects of the situation, design decisions, or social norms and culture. Focusing on blame, however, can inhibit effective learning, instead eliciting excuses to deflect attention and perceived culpability. Productive understanding of what went wrong, and how to do better, thus requires moving past recrimination and excuses. This article identifies common blame‐shifting “lame excuses” for poor risk management. These generally contribute little to effective improvements and may leave real risks and preventable causes unaddressed. We propose principles from risk and decision sciences and organizational design to improve results. These start with organizational leadership. More specifically, they include: deliberate testing and learning—especially from near‐misses and accident precursors; careful causal analysis of accidents; risk quantification; candid expression of uncertainties about costs and benefits of risk‐reduction options; optimization of tradeoffs between gathering additional information and immediate action; promotion of safety culture; and mindful allocation of people, responsibilities, and resources to reduce risks. We propose that these principles provide sound foundations for improving successful risk management.     

Probability Information in Risk Communication: A Review of the Research Literature

Communicating probability information about risks to the public is more difficult than might be expected. Many studies have examined this subject, so that their resulting recommendations are scattered over various publications, diverse research fields, and are about different presentation formats. An integration of empirical findings in one review would be useful therefore to describe the evidence base for communication about probability information and to present the recommendations that can be made so far. We categorized the studies in the following presentation formats: frequencies, percentages, base rates and proportions, absolute and relative risk reduction, cumulative probabilities, verbal probability information, numerical versus verbal probability information, graphs, and risk ladders. We suggest several recommendations for these formats. Based on the results of our review, we show that the effects of presentation format depend not only on the type of format, but also on the context in which the format is used. We therefore argue that the presentation format has the strongest effect when the receiver processes probability information heuristically instead of systematically. We conclude that future research and risk communication practitioners should not only concentrate on the presentation format of the probability information but also on the situation in which this message is presented, as this may predict how people process the information and how this may influence their interpretation of the risk.     

Testing and Expanding a Model of Cognitive Processing of Risk Information

Scholars have begun to explore the role of modes of information processing and related audience characteristics in reactions to risky situations and risk information.((11, 12, 14, 17, 18, 20))"Information processing" concerns how people attend to and consider available information: systematic processors analyze messages and situations carefully, while heuristic processors skim and use cues (e.g., opinions of trusted reference groups) for quick judgments. This article uses scenarios about a semi-hypothetical industrial facility, in particular risk comparisons being considered by its manager for inclusion in a talk to the community, to explore the impact of information processing. Information insufficiency, self-assessed capacity to understand information, and information-seeking propensities are tested for potential effects on information processing about industrial risks by people living near industry. As well as testing established models, this article explores the additional explanatory value of involvement, relevance, and ability (Earle et al., 1990) and objective knowledge. Both existing model variables and new ones have significant effects on information seeking and information processing in this case, and partly confirm earlier results. Trumbo((17,18)) found that heuristic processors saw lower risk and systematic processors higher risk from suspected cancer clusters. In this study, reporting knowledge about local industrial risks as insufficient for one's purposes and self-reported avoidance of such information both raised ratings of the facility's risk and lowered ratings of its acceptability. Neither type of information processing significantly affected risk or acceptability judgments, but both increased risk ratings and heuristic processing had more effect than systematic processing. Positive ratings of risk comparisons' clarity and meaningfulness decreased risk and increased acceptability ratings, dominated other information variables in predictive power, and exceeded risk, benefit, and trust in contribution to acceptability judgments. Despite differences across studies in designs and variables, and the embryonic development of appropriate (self-reported) measures for use in field surveys, these results confirm the potential value of further research in how information seeking and processing affect risk beliefs and reactions to risk communications.     

Travel Risks in a Time of Terror: Judgments and Choices

Shortly after the 2002 terrorist attacks in Bali, readers of Conde Nast Traveler magazine were surveyed regarding their views on the risks of travel to various destinations. Their risk estimates were highest for Israel, and lowest for Canada. Estimates for the different destinations correlated positively with (1) one another, (2) concern over aspects of travel that can make one feel at risk (e.g., sticking out as an American), (3) worries about other travel problems (e.g., contracting an infectious disease), and (4) attitudes toward risk. Respondents' willingness to travel to a destination was predicted well by whether their estimate of its risk was above or below their general threshold for the acceptability of travel risks. Overall, the responses suggest orderly choices, based on highly uncertain judgments of risks. Worry played a significant role in these choices, even after controlling for cognitive considerations, thereby supporting the recently proposed "risk as feelings" hypothesis. Thus, even among people who have generally consistent and defensible beliefs, emotions may affect choices. These results emerged with people selected for their interest in and experience with the decision domain (travel), but challenged to incorporate a new concern (terror).     

Applying a Health Behavior Theory to Explore the Influence of Information and Experience on Arsenic Risk Representations, Policy Beliefs, and Protective Behavior

The common sense model (CSM) shows how people process information to construct representations, or mental models, that guide responses to health threats. We applied the CSM to understand how people responded to information about arsenic-contaminated well water. Constructs included external information (arsenic level and information use), experience (perceived water quality and arsenic-related health effects), representations, safety judgments, opinions about policies to mitigate environmental arsenic, and protective behavior. Of 649 surveys mailed to private well users with arsenic levels exceeding the maximum contaminant level, 545 (84%) were analyzed. Structural equation modeling quantified CSM relationships. Both external information and experience had substantial effects on behavior. Participants who identified a water problem were more likely to reduce exposure to arsenic. However, about 60% perceived good water quality and 60% safe water. Participants with higher arsenic levels selected higher personal safety thresholds and 20% reported a lower arsenic level than indicated by their well test. These beliefs would support judgments of safe water. A variety of psychological and contextual factors may explain judgments of safe water when information suggested otherwise. Information use had an indirect effect on policy beliefs through understanding environmental causes of arsenic. People need concrete information about environmental risk at both personal and environmental-systems levels to promote a comprehensive understanding and response. The CSM explained responses to arsenic information and may have application to other environmental risks.     

Geographic Distributions of Extreme Weather Risk Perceptions in the United States

Weather and climate disasters pose an increasing risk to life and property in the United States. Managing this risk requires objective information about the nature of the threat and subjective information about how people perceive it. Meteorologists and climatologists have a relatively firm grasp of the historical objective risk. For example, we know which parts of the United States are most likely to experience drought, heat waves, flooding, snow or ice storms, tornadoes, and hurricanes. We know less about the geographic distribution of the perceived risks of meteorological events and trends. Do subjective perceptions align with exposure to weather risks? This question is difficult to answer because analysts have yet to develop a comprehensive and spatially consistent methodology for measuring risk perceptions across geographic areas in the United States. In this project, we propose a methodology that uses multilevel regression and poststratification to estimate extreme weather and climate risk perceptions by geographic area (i.e., region, state, forecast area, and county). Then we apply the methodology using data from three national surveys (n = 9,542). This enables us to measure, map, and compare perceptions of risk from multiple weather hazards in geographic areas across the country.     

The Unintended Effects of Risk‐Refuting Information on Anxiety

Researchers in the field of risk perception have been asking why people are more worried about risk today than in years past. This article explores one possible answer to this question, associative anxiety. The affect heuristic and the mental network models suggest that anxiety triggered by information regarding a particular risk can spread to other risks of the same category. Research to date, however, has not examined how information refuting the particular risk can also be generalized across other risks. The article presents two experimental studies addressing this issue. Study 1 showed that when participants were presented with information based on a real train collision, they experienced increased anxiety not only about train collisions but also about public transportation in general. In contrast, those who were informed about the train collision case as well as the preventative measures implemented after the accident experienced decreased anxiety about train collisions but not about public transportation more generally. Study 2 measured the changes in participant anxiety about a genetically modified organism (GMO) and compared the influence of information about either the existence or nonexistence of its risk. Similar to Study 1, associative anxiety rippled through the risk category. The results also suggest that the follow‐up information refuting the GMO risk reduced the anxiety toward the hazard drastically, but did not fully alleviate the anxiety toward other hazards in the category. The implications and the limitations of these studies are also discussed.     

Negotiate the salary you want

How can physician executives negotiate the salary and terms that they want for a new position? The idea of negotiation raises the anxiety level of all but a few people, those who thrive on the thrill of competitive bargaining. Most physicians do not relish the process and view it as a type of conflict. But without knowing what you want to accomplish and preparing to ask for it, you may well leave the meeting frustrated and unhappy with the offer. Determine what you want before you get into an important negotiation. You will get clear on what you want much quicker and you will remember the points better when you talk to the other person.     

Risk Knowledge and Risk Attitudes Regarding Nuclear Energy Sources in Space

A series of four studies examined the relationship between how much people know about the risks of using nuclear energy sources in space and how they feel about the technology. We found that the more people know, the more favorable they are—except for two groups of people selected from organizations with strong pro-industry or pro-environment positions. These results suggest that a technology will get a more favorable hearing if it can get its message out—providing that it has a legitimate story to tell and that the situation has not become too polarized already. The limits to these conclusions are discussed.     

POM Forum: Transfer of Changing Production Know‐How

Even with the rich literature on knowledge management, we still don't know enough about how the rate of change in production‐know‐how affects the choice of mechanisms for its transfer. Codifying tacit know‐how helps, but codification becomes more challenging as the know‐how changes more frequently. Transfer of tacit know‐how becomes much more complicated when it changes often. We need more research in this area, particularly to help production and operations managers who must ultimately use the new know‐how and change their companies' production processes. The paper suggests a framework as a step in that direction. The framework focuses on the interplay between the level of codification and the rate of change of production know‐how, and identifies four zones for classifying production know‐how: “slow and codified,” “slow and tacit,” “fast and codified,” and “fast and tacit.” Examples from McDonald̂s, Club Med, Intel, and AOL are used to illustrate primary transfer mechanisms for each zone (manuals and systems, people, joint‐development, and projects, respectively). Appropriate absorptive capacities in the production units for each zone are also identified. Since the ultimate responsibility of operations managers is to improve (i.e., change) their production know‐how as fast as possible, they would be wise to adopt policies that are closer to those suited for the “fast and codified” zone. Intel and Toyota show good models.     

Using Risk Communication to Disclose the Outcome of a Participatory Decision-Making Process: Effects on the Perceived Acceptability of Risk-Policy Decisions

It has been suggested that public participation during decision making about risks can lead to more widely accepted risk policies. This article discusses an experiment to determine if this is true when people are made aware of the fact that a participatory decision-making process has taken place only through information disclosed during a subsequent risk communication effort. The results from this experiment showed that, after receiving information during risk communication that cast risk policies about space exploration as the product of a participatory decision process, participants in the study felt more supportive of the resulting decisions than did participants in a control group. This result coincided with the participants in the study group perceiving the risks associated with the decision to be lower and the benefits higher. Responses from these participants also showed that they were more satisfied with the decision-making process than they were with the outcome of the decision itself Therefore, it may be premature to view the objective of participatory decision-making approaches-and the risk communication efforts that discuss them-as a means of making risk policies more widely acceptable to the public at large. Rather, it may be better to view the benefits of these approaches in terms of their ability to help lead to higher quality decisions that are the product of more widely accepted decision processes.     

Communication About Micropollutants in Drinking Water: Effects of the Presentation and Psychological Processes

This study investigates how people change their risk perception, trust, and behavior as a consequence of being informed about the occurrence of micropollutants in drinking water. Micropollutants are substances present in extremely low concentrations that might be dangerous in higher concentrations. Data were gathered in the city of Zurich, Switzerland in 2013 using a questionnaire in which the information on micropollutants was presented differently to 12 experimental groups. Data of the key constructs were gathered before and after this information, so that causal effects could be quantified by regression analyses. Affective reactions to the information turned out to be the critical mediator of changes in risk perception (operationalized as the perceived change of quality due to pollution), which is an important determinant of changes in behavior and trust. Also, direct effects of affective reactions on behavior and trust were observed. Trust before appraising risks reduces negative affective reactions; however, it also reduces perceived quality (i.e., increases risk perception) and trust after risks are appraised. The different forms of information mainly influenced the participants’ affective reactions, but they also influenced perceived quality. The presentation with the least negative effects was a comparison of the intake of the substance by water with intake by food. The experimental design with repeated measurement that considers trust as a determinant and consequence of risk perception uncovered positive and negative effects of trust before appraising risks on changes of risk perception and trust due to appraising risks.     

Diversity Networks: Networking for Equality?

In recent years, the use of diversity networks as diversity management instruments in organizations has increased tremendously. Diversity networks support the needs of employees with different social identities, such as women, ethnic minorities, LGBTs, disabled and young people. The aim of this study is to come to a better understanding of how diversity networks contribute to equality by examining how diversity network leaders discursively construct the value of their networks against the backdrop of discourses on diversity and equality. We conducted a multiple case study of five different diversity networks in a financial service organization in the Netherlands. Our results show that network leaders tend to construct the value of their networks primarily in terms of individual career development and community building, to prevent their members’ isolation. However, they are much less articulate about removing the barriers to inclusion in the organization as a core value of their networks. We conclude that the value of diversity networks is limited when these networks only address the individual and group levels of equality and leave systemic inequalities at the organizational level unchallenged.