Abstract
Psychometric data on risk perceptions are often collected using the method developed by Slovic, Fischhoff, and Lichtenstein, where an array of risk issues are evaluated with respect to a number of risk characteristics, such as how dreadful, catastrophic or involuntary exposure to each risk is. The analysis of these data has often been carried out at an aggregate level, where mean scores for all respondents are compared between risk issues. However, this approach may conceal important variation between individuals, and individual analyses have also been performed for single risk issues. This paper presents a new methodological approach using a technique called multilevel modelling for analysing individual and aggregated responses simultaneously, to produce unconditional and unbiased results at both individual and aggregate levels of the data. Two examples are given using previously published data sets on risk perceptions collected by the authors, and results between the traditional and new approaches compared. The discussion focuses on the implications of and possibilities provided by the new methodology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
B. Fischhoff, P. Slovic, and S. Lichtenstein, ''The public vs. 'the experts' '', in V. T. Covello, W. G. Flamm, J. V. Rodricks, and R. G. Tardiff (eds.), The Analysis of Actual vs Perceived Risks,Plenum, New York, 1983, pp. 235–249.
G. T. Gardner and L. C. Gould, ''Public Perception of the Risks and Benefits of Technology,'' Risk Anal.9225–242 (1989).
S. Georgiou, I. H. Langford, I. J. Bateman, and R. K. Turner, ''Determinants of Individual's Willingness To Pay for Reductions in Environmental Health Risks:ACase Study of Bathing Water Quality,'' Environ.Plan.A 30577–594 (1998).
H. Goldstein, Multilevel Statistical Models(Edward Arnold, London, 1995).
H. Goldstein, J. Rasbash, I. Plewis et.al., A User's Guide to MLwiN (Multilevel Models Project, (Institute of Education, London, 1998).
H. Goldstein and J. Rasbash, ''Improved Approximations for Multilevel Models with Binary Responses,'' J.Roy.Stat.Soc.Ser.A 159505–514 (1996).
H. Goldstein and J. Rasbash, ''Efficient Computational Procedures for the Estimation of Parameters in Multilevel Models Based on Iterative Generalised Least Squares,'' Comp.Stat. Data Anal.1363–71 (1992).
C. M. Harding and R. Eiser, ''Characterising the Perceived Risks and Benefits of Some Health Issues,'' Risk Anal.4131–141 (1984).
N. N. Kraus and P. Slovic, ''Taxonomic Analysis of Perceived Risk: Modelling Individual and Group Perceptions Within Homogeneous Hazard Domains,'' Risk Anal.8135–455 (1988).
I. H. Langford and G. Bentham, ''A Multi-level Model of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome in England and Wales,'' Environ. Plan.A 29629–640 (1997).
I. H. Langford, G. Bentham, and A.-L. McDonald, ''Multilevel Modelling of Geographically Aggregated Health Data:ACase Study on Malignant Melanoma Mortality and UV Exposure in the European Community: A Multi-level Modelling Approach,'' Stat.Med.17.141–58 (1997).
C. Marris, I. Langford, and T. O'Riordan, Integrating Sociological and Psychological Approaches to Public Perceptions of Environmental Risks: Detailed Results from a Questionnaire Survey(CSERGE Working Paper GEC 96–07, Centre for Social and Economic Research into the Global Environment, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, 1996a).
C. Marris, A. Simpson, and T. O'Riordan, ''Redefining the Cultural Context of Risk Perceptions,'' Paper presented at the 1995 Annual Meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis-Europe in Stuttgart, Germany (May 1995).
C. Marris, I. H. Langford, T. Saunderson, and T. O'Riordan, ''Exploring the 'Psychometric Paradigm': Comparisons Between Aggregate and Individual Analyses,'' Risk Anal.17.3303–312 (1997).
R. G. Peters, V. T. Covello, and D. B. McCallum, ''The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: Am Empirical Study,'' Risk Anal.17.143–54 (1997).
Royal Society, Risk Analysis, Perception and Management: Report of a Royal Society Study Group(The Royal Society, London, 1992).
S. R. Searle, G. Casella, and C. E. McCulloch, Variance Components(Wiley, New York, 1992).
P. Slovic, ''Perception of Risk: Reflections on the Psychometric Paradigm,'' in S. Krimsky and D. Golding (eds.), Social Theories of Risk(Praeger, Westport, 1992), pp. 117–152.
P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff, and S. Lichtenstein, ''Facts and Fears: Understanding Perceived Risk,'' in R. C. Schwing and W. A. Albers (eds.), Societal Risk Assessment: How Safe is Safe Enough?(Plenum Press, New York, 1980), pp. 181–216.
P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff, and S. Lichtenstein, ''Why Study Risk Perception?'' Risk Anal.283–93 (1982).
P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff, and S. Lichtenstein, ''Characterizing Perceived Risk,'' in R. W. Kates, C. Hohenemser, and J. X. Kasperson (eds.), Perilous Progress: Managing the Hazards of Technology(Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1985).
C. W. Trumbo, ''Examining Psychometrics and Polarization in a Single-Risk Case Study,'' Risk Anal.16.3429–438.
C. Vlek and P. J. Stallen, ''Judging Risks and Benefits in the Small and Large,'' Org.Behav.Hum.Perf.28235–271 (1981).
H. Goldstein and I. H. Langford, ''Multilevel factor analysis and structural equation modelling using data augmentation.'' Submitted to British Journal of Mathematical Psychology (1999).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Langford, I.H., Marris, C., McDonald, AL. et al. Simultaneous Analysis of Individual and Aggregate Responses in Psychometric Data Using Multilevel Modeling. Risk Anal 19, 675–683 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007037720715
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007037720715