Skip to main content

Cultural Cognition as a Conception of the Cultural Theory of Risk

  • Reference work entry

Abstract

Cultural cognition is one of a variety of approaches designed to empirically test the “cultural theory of risk” set forth by Mary Douglas and Aaron Wildavsky. The basic premise of cultural theory is that individuals can be expected to form beliefs about societal dangers that reflect and reinforce their commitments to one or another idealized form of social ordering. Among the features of cultural cognition that make it distinctive among conceptions of cultural theory are its approach to measuring individuals’ cultural worldviews; its empirical investigation of the social psychological mechanisms that connect individuals’ risk perceptions to their cultural worldviews; and its practical goal of enabling self-conscious management of popular risk perceptions in the interest of promoting scientifically sound public policies that are congenial to persons of diverse outlooks.

Keywords

  • Risk Perception
  • Cultural Cognition
  • Cultural Predisposition
  • Cultural Theory
  • Collective Management

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-1433-5_28
  • Chapter length: 35 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   699.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-94-007-1433-5
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Hardcover Book
USD   849.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 28.1
Fig. 28.2
Fig. 28.3
Fig. 28.4
Fig. 28.5
Fig. 28.6
Fig. 28.7
Fig. 28.8
Fig. 28.9
Fig. 28.10
Fig. 28.11
Fig. 28.12
Fig. 28.13
Fig. 28.14
Fig. 28.15
Fig. 28.16
Fig. 28.17
Fig. 28.18

References

  • Aiken LS, West SG, Reno RR (1991) Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Sage, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Balkin JM (1998) Cultural Software. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Boudon R (1998) Social mechanisms without black boxes. In: Hedström P, Swedberg R (eds) Social mechanisms: an analytical approach to social theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 172–203

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Braman D, Kahan DM, Grimmelmann J (2005) Modeling facts, culture, and cognition in the gun debate. Soc J Res 18:283–304

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen GL (2003) Party over policy: the dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. J Pers Soc Psychol 85(5):808–822

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen GL, Aronson J, Steele CM (2000) When beliefs yield to evidence: reducing biased evaluation by affirming the self. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 26(9):1151–1164

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen GL, Bastardi A, Sherman DK, Hsu L, McGoey M, Ross L (2007) Bridging the partisan divide: self-affirmation reduces ideological closed-mindedness and inflexibility in negotiation. J Pers Soc Psychol 93(3):415–430

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cultural Cognition Project (2007) The second national risk and culture study: Making sense of - and making progress in - the American culture war of fact. Yale Law School, New Haven, Conn. October 2007, available at http://www.culturalcognition.net/projects/second-national-risk-culture-study.html

  • Dake K (1990) Technology on trial: orienting dispositions toward environmental and health standards. Ph.D. dissertation. University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Dake K (1991) Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk: an analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. J Cross Cult Psychol 22:61

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Dake K (1992) Myths of nature: culture and the social construction of risk. J Soc Issues 48(4):21–37

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Deuteronomy 28:22 (1997). In New American Standard Bible

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas M (1966) Purity and danger: an analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo. Routledge, London

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas M (1970) Natural symbols: explorations in cosmology. Barrie & Rockliff the Cresset Press, London

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas M (1982) In the active voice. Routledge & K. Paul, London/Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas M (1985) Risk acceptability according to the social sciences. Russell Sage, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas M (1986) How Institutions Think, 1st edn. Syracuse University Press, Syracuse

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas M (1992) Risk and blame: essays in cultural theory. Routledge, London/New York

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas M (1997) The depoliticization of risk. In: Ellis RJ, Thompson M (eds) Culture matters: essays in honor of Aaron Wildavsky. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 121–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas M (2003) Being fair to hierarchists. Univ Penn Law Rev 151(4):1349–1370

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas M, Wildavsky AB (1982) Risk and culture: an essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis RJ, Thompson F (1997) Culture and the environment in the Pacific Northwest. Am Polit Sci Rev 91(4):885–898

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Elster J (1985) Making sense of Marx. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Finucane M, Slovic P, Mertz CK, Flynn J, Satterfield TA (2000) Gender, race, and perceived risk: the “white male” effect. Health Risk Soc'y 3(2):159–172

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gastil J, Jenkins-Smith H, Silva C (1995) Analysis of cultural bias survey items (Institute for Public Policy, University of New Mexico, 1995)

    Google Scholar 

  • Giner-Sorolla R, Chaiken S (1997) Selective use of heuristic and systematic processing under defense motivation. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 23(1):84–97

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gross JL, Rayner S (1985) Measuring culture: a paradigm for the analysis of social organization. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins-Smith H (2001) Modeling stigma: an empirical analysis of nuclear waste images of Nevada. In: Flynn J, Slovic P, Kunreuther H (eds) Risk, media, and stigma: understanding public challenges to modern science and technology. Earthscan, London/Sterling, pp 107–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins-Smith HC, Herron KG (2009) Rock and a hard place: public willingness to trade civil rights and liberties for greater security. Polit Policy 37(5):1095–1129

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Judd CM (2000) Everyday data analysis in social psychology: comparisons of linear models. In: Reis HT, Judd CM (eds) Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 370–392

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM (2007) The cognitively illiberal state. Stan L Rev 60:115–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM (2010) Emotion in risk regulation: competing theories. In: Roeser S (ed) Emotions and risky technologies. Springer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM, Braman D (2003a) Caught in the crossfire: a defense of the cultural theory of gun-risk perceptions - response. Univ Penn Law Rev 151(4):1395–1416

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM, Braman D (2003b) More statistics, less persuasion: a cultural theory of gun-risk perceptions. Univ Pann Law Rev 151:1291–1327

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM, Braman D (2006) Cultural cognition of public policy. Yale J L & Pub Pol'y 24:147–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM, Slovic P, Braman D, Gastil J (2006) Fear of democracy: a cultural critique of sunstein on risk. Harv Law Rev 119:1071–1109

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM, Braman D, Gastil J, Slovic P, Mertz CK (2007) Culture and identity-protective cognition: explaining the white-male effect in risk perception. J Empirical Legal Stud 4(3):465–505

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM, Braman D, Slovic P, Gastil J, Cohen G (2009) Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of Nanotechnology. Nat Nanotechnol 4(2):87–91

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM, Braman D, Cohen GL, Gastil J, Slovic P (2010a) Who fears the HPV vaccine, who doesn't, and why? An experimental study of the mechanisms of cultural cognition. Law Hum Behav 34:501–16

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM, Braman D, Monahan J, Callahan L, Peters E (2010b) Cultural cognition and public policy: the case of outpatient commitment laws. Law Hum Behav 34:118–140

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM, Jenkins-Smith HC, Braman D (2011) Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. J Risk Res 14:147–74

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D, Tversky A (1982) Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. In: Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (eds) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York, pp 163–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Langford IH, Georgiou S, Bateman IJ, Day RJ, Turner RK (2000) Public perceptions of health risks from polluted coastal bathing waters: a mixed methodological analysis using cultural theory. Risk Anal 20(5):691–704

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lord CG, Ross L, Lepper MR (1979) Biased assimilation and attitude polarization – effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. J Pers Soc Psychol 37(11):2098–2109

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mamadouh V (1999) Grid-group cultural theory: an introduction. GeoJournal 47:395–409

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Manton KG, Woodbury MA, Stallard E, Corder LS (1992) The use of grade-of-membership techniques to estimate regression relationships. Sociol Methodol 22:321–381

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Marris C, Langford IH, O'Riordan T (1998) A quantitative test of the cultural theory of risk perceptions: comparison with the psychometric paradigm. Risk Anal 18(5):635–647

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett RE (2003) The geography of thought: how Asians and Westerners think differently–and why. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Connor RE, Bord RJ, Fisher A (1998) Rating threat mitigators: faith in experts, governments, and individuals themselves to create a safer world. Risk Anal 18(5):547–556

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Peters E, Slovic P (1996) The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. J Appl Soc Psychol 26(16):1427–1453

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rayner S (1992) Cultural theory and risk analysis. In: Krimsky S, Golding D (eds) Social theories of risk. Praeger, Westport, pp 83–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva CL, Jenkins-Smith HC (2007) The precautionary principle in context: U.S. and E.U. scientists' prescriptions for policy in the face of uncertainty. Soc Sci Q 88(3):640–664

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P (2000) The Perception of Risk. Earthscan Publications, London/Sterling, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg L (1998a) Explaining risk perception: an empirical evaluation of cultural theory. In: Löfstedt RE, Frewer L (eds) The earthscan reader in risk and modern society, vol 2. Earthscan, London, pp 115–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg L (1998b) World views, political attitudes, and risk perception. Risk Health Saf Environ 9:137–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson M, Ellis R, Wildavsky A (1990) Cultural theory. Westview Press, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Verweij M, Thompson M (eds) (2006) Clumsy solutions for a complex world: governance, politics, and plural perceptions. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills/Basingstoke/Hampshire/New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Verweij M, Douglas M, Ellis R, Engel C, Hendriks F, Lohmann S et al (2006) Clumsy solutions for a complex world: the case of climate change. Public Admin 84(4):817–843

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky AB (1991) The rise of radical egalitarianism. American University Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky A, Dake K (1990) Theories of risk perception: who fears what and why? Daedalus 114:41–60

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Research described herein was supported by the National Science Foundation (Grants SES-0621840 & SES-0242106) and the Oscar M. Ruebhausen Fund at Yale Law School.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dan M. Kahan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this entry

Cite this entry

Kahan, D.M. (2012). Cultural Cognition as a Conception of the Cultural Theory of Risk. In: Roeser, S., Hillerbrand, R., Sandin, P., Peterson, M. (eds) Handbook of Risk Theory. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1433-5_28

Download citation