Abstract
This research explores public judgments about the threat-reducing potential of experts, individual behavior, and government spending. The data are responses of a national sample of 1225 to mail surveys that include measures of several dimensions of public judgments about violent crime, automobile accidents, hazardous chemical waste, air pollution, water pollution, global warming, AIDS, heart disease, and cancer. Beliefs about who can best mitigate threats are specific to classes of threats. In general, there is little faith that experts can do much about violent crime and automobile accidents, moderate faith in their ability to address problems of global warming, and greater expectations for expert solutions to the remaining threats. People judge individual behavior as effective in reducing the threats of violent crime, AIDS, heart disease, and automobile accidents but less so for the remaining threats. Faith in more government spending is highest for AIDS and the other two health items, lowest for the trio of violent crime, automobile accidents, and global warming, and moderate for the remaining threats. For most threats, people are not distributed at the extremes in judging mitigators. Strong attitudinal and demographic cleavages are also lacking, although some interesting relationships occur. This relative lack of sharp cleavages and the generally moderate opinion indicate ample opportunity for public education and risk communication.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff, and S. Lichtenstein, “Facts and Fears: Understanding Perceived Risk,” in R. Schwing and W. Alberts (eds.), Societal Risk Assessment: How Safe is Safe Enough? (Plenum, New York, 1980), pp. 181–214.
P. Slovic, “Perceptions of Risk,” Science 236, 280–285 (1987).
T. McDaniels, L. Axelrod, N. Cavanagh, and P. Slovic, “Perceptions of Ecological Risk to Water Environments,” Risk Anal. 17(3), 341–52 (1997).
P. Slovic, “Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk-Assessment Battlefield,” in M. Bazerman, D. Messick, A. Tenbrunsel, and K. Wade-Benzoni (eds.), Environment, Ethics, and Behavior (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1996).
M. Douglas, and A. Wildavsky, Risks and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers (University of California Press, Berkeley, 1982).
A. Wildavsky, “Choosing Preferences by Constructing Institutions: A Cultural Theory of Preference Formation,” Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 81(1), 2–22 (1987).
M. Thompson, R. Ellis, and A. Wildavsky, Cultural Theory (Westview Press, (Boulder, 1990).
A. Wildavsky and K. Dake, “Theories of Risk Perception: Who Fears What and Why?” Daedalus 119(4), 41–60 (1990).
S. Rayner, “Cultural Theory and Risk Analysis,” in S. Krimsky and D. Golding (eds.), Social Theories of Risk, (Praeger, Westport, CT, 1992), pp. 83–115.
T. Earle and G. Cvetkovich, “Culture, Cosmopolitanism, and Risk Management,” Risk Anal. 17(1), 55–65 (1997).
K. Dake, “Myths of Nature: Culture and the Social Construction of Risk,” J. Soc. Issues 48(4), 21–37 (1992).
K. Dake, “Orienting Dispositions in the Perception of Risk: An Analysis of Contemporary Worldviews and Cultural Biases,” J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 22(1), 61–82 (1991).
R. Ellis, American Political Cultures (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1993).
S. A. MacManus, Young v. Old: Generational Combat in the 21st Century (Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1996).
D. Davidson and W. Freudenburg, “Gender and Environmental Risk Concerns: A Review and Analysis of Available Research,” Environ. Behav. 28, 302–39 (1996).
R. Bord and R. O'Connor, “The Gender Gap in Environmental Attitudes: The Case of Perceived Vulnerability to Risk,” Soc. Sci. Quart. 78(4), 830–840 (1997).
R. Dunlap, “The New Environmental Paradigm: A Proposed Measuring Instrument and Preliminary Results,” J. Environ. Educ. 9, 10–19 (1978).
J. Pierce, N. Lovrich, and T. Tsurutani, “Culture, Politics and Mass Publics: Traditional and Modern Supporters of the New Environmental Paradigm in Japan and the United States,” J. Politics 49(1), 54–79 (1987).
J. Gastil, H. Jenkins-Smith, and C. Silva, Analysis of Cultural Bias Survey Items (Institute for Public Policy, University of New Mexico).
R. Dunlap and R. Scarce, “The Polls—Poll Trends: Environmental Problems and Protection,” Public Opin. Quart. 55(4), 651–672 (1991).
R. O'Connor, R. Bord, and K. Pflugh, “The Two Faces of Coastal Environmentalism: Environmental Protection and Development on Cape May,” Coastal Mgmt 22(2), 183–194 (1994).
A. Fisher, “Risk Communication Challenges,” Risk Analysis, 11(2), 173–179 (1991).
J. Nye, P. Zelikow, and D. King (eds.), Why People Don't Trust Government (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1997).
P. Sabatier, and H. Jenkins-Smith (eds.), Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach. (Westview Press, Boulder, 1993).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
O'Connor, R.E., Bord, R.J. & Fisher, A. Rating Threat Mitigators: Faith in Experts, Governments, and Individuals Themselves to Create a Safer World. Risk Anal 18, 547–556 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RIAN.0000005929.21712.78
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RIAN.0000005929.21712.78