Skip to main content

Risk Perception

  • Reference work entry

Synonyms

Risk aversion; Risk taking

Definition

Risk perceptions are beliefs about potential harm or the possibility of a loss. It is a subjective judgment that people make about the characteristics and severity of a risk.

Description

The degree of risk associated with a given behavior is generally considered to represent the likelihood and consequences of harmful effects that result from that behavior. To perceive risk includes evaluations of the probability as well as the consequences of an uncertain outcome. There are three dimensions of perceived risk – perceived likelihood (the probability that one will be harmed by the hazard), perceived susceptibility (an individual’s constitutional vulnerability to a hazard), and perceived severity (the extent of harm a hazard would cause). Risk perceptions are central to many health behavior theories. For example, models that have been developed specifically to predict health behavior such as the health belief model (Rosenstock, 1966),...

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   1,199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References and Readings

  • Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckman (Eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2006). The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic: Why the adjustments are insufficient. Psychological Science, 17, 311–318.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1983). The Public vs. ‘the Experts’. In V. T. Covello, W. G. Flamm, J. V. Rodricks, & R. G. Tardiff (Eds.), The analysis of actual vs. perceived risks (pp. 235–249). New York: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S., & Combs, B. (1978). How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Studies, 9, 127–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude and intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (2002). Heuristics and biases – The psychology of intuitive judgment. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80, 237–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, H., Meyer, D., & Nerenz, D. (1980). The common sense representation of illness danger. Medical Psychology, 2, 7–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plous, S. (1993). The psychology of judgment and decision making. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. W. (1975). A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology, 91, 93–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenstock, I. M. (1966). Why people use health services. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 44, 94–127.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (2000). The perception of risk. Virginia: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1980). Facts and fears: Understanding perceived risk. In R. C. Schwing & W. A. Albers (Eds.), Societal risk assessment: How safe is safe enough? (pp. 181–216). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1982). Why study risk perception? Risk Analysis, 2, 83–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1985). Characterizing perceived risk. In R. W. Kates, C. Hohenemser, & J. X. Kasperson (Eds.), Perilous progress: Managing the Hazarak of technologv. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgments under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, A., & Dake, K. (1990). Theories of risk perception: Who fears what and why? American Academy of Arts and Sciences (Daedalus), 119, 41–60.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catherine Darker .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media, New York

About this entry

Cite this entry

Darker, C. (2013). Risk Perception. In: Gellman, M.D., Turner, J.R. (eds) Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_866

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_866

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-1004-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-1005-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineReference Module Medicine

Publish with us

Policies and ethics