Skip to main content
Log in

Risk cognition and the public: The case of Three Mile Island

  • Forum
  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Residents of within 50 miles of the nuclear power plant at Three Mile Island (TMI), Pennsylvania, were surveyed in 1979, 1980, and 1982 to assess their general attitudes toward nuclear power, to assess their individual coping responses to the March 1979 accident, and to monitor changes in attitudes over the three-year period. Most respondents feel that future accidents like TMI will occur once or twice more in their lifetimes, that operating nuclear power stations should have improved safeguards and should continue operating, and that major institutions—government and utility companies—are experiencing a continued erosion of public trust.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature cited

  • Barkan, S. E. 1979. Strategic, tactical and organizational dilemmas of the protest movement against nuclear power.Social Problems 27:19–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter, S., J. Brosius, K. Barnes, and J. K. Mitchell. 1979. Special session on Three Mile Island: risk evaluation and evacuation responses. Proceedings, Middle States Division, Association of American Geographers 13:80–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter, S. and K. Barnes. 1982. Three Mile Island: risk assessment and coping responses of local residents. A summary report. Rutgers University Department of Geography discussion paper #20. New Brunswick, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter, S. and K. Barnes. 1982. Evacuation behavior and Three Mile Island.Disasters 6(2): 116–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dynes, R. R., A. H. Purcell, D. E. Wenger, P. S. Stern, R. A. Stallings, and Q. T. Johnson. 1979. Report of the Emergency Preparedness and Response Task Force: the Presidents Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B., P. Slovic, and S. Lichtenstein. 1979. Weighing the risks.Environment 21:17–20, 32–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B., S. Lichtenstein, P. Slovic, S. L. Derby, and R. L. Keeney. 1981. Acceptable risk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, C. B., and J. A. Chalmers. 1980. The social and economic effects of the accident at Three Mile Island: findings to date. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NUREG/CR-1215).

  • Flynn, C. B. 1982. Reactions of local residents to the accident at Three Mile Island. Pages 49–63in D. L. Sills, C. P. Wolf, and V. B. Shelanski (eds.), Accident at Three Mile Island: the human dimensions. Westview, Boulder, CO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, R. E. 1980. No moral nukes.Ethics 90:417–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harriss, R. C., C. Hohenemser, and R. W. Kates. 1978. Our hazardous environment.Environment 20:6–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R. E., G. Berk, D. Pijawka, A. B. Sharof, and J. Wood. 1980. Public opposition to nuclear energy: retrospect and prospect.Science, Technology and Human Values 5:11–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. C. 1980. Public opinion and nuclear power before and after Three Mile Island.Resources (Resources for the Future) 64:5–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. C. 1981. From elite quarrel to mass movement.Transaction/Society 18:76–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. P. 1981. Three Mile Island and residential property values: empirical analysis and policy implications.Land Economics 57:363–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H. J., D. Maurer, and K. Thomas. 1978. Nuclear power: the question of public acceptance.Futures 10:109–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulman, M. A. 1979. The impact of Three Mile Island.Public Opinion June/July:7–9, 23–26.

  • Schwing, R. C., and W. A. Albers, Jr. (eds.). 1980. Societal Risk Assessment How Safe is Safe Enough? Plenum, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., B. Fischhoff, and S. Lichtenstein. 1979. Rating the risks.Environment 21:14–20, 36–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., F. Fischhoff, and S. Lichtenstein. 1980. Facts and fears: understanding perceived risk. Pages 181–214in R. C. Schwing and W. A. Albers, Jr. (eds.), Societal risk assessment: how safe is safe enough? Plenum, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, A. V. and I. Burton. 1980. Environmental risk assessment. Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler, D. J., S. D. Brunn, and J. H. Johnson, Jr. 1981. Evacuation from a nuclear technological disaster.Geographical Review 71:1–16.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cutter, S.L. Risk cognition and the public: The case of Three Mile Island. Environmental Management 8, 15–20 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867869

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867869

Key words

Navigation