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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Aiken LS, West SG, Reno RR (1991) Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Sage, Newbury Park
Balkin JM (1998) Cultural Software. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven
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
Braman D, Kahan DM, Grimmelmann J (2005) Modeling facts, culture, and cognition in the gun debate. Soc J Res 18:283–304
Cohen GL (2003) Party over policy: the dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. J Pers Soc Psychol 85(5):808–822
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
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
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
Dake K (1991) Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk: an analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. J Cross Cult Psychol 22:61
Dake K (1992) Myths of nature: culture and the social construction of risk. J Soc Issues 48(4):21–37
Deuteronomy 28:22 (1997). In New American Standard Bible
Douglas M (1966) Purity and danger: an analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo. Routledge, London
Douglas M (1970) Natural symbols: explorations in cosmology. Barrie & Rockliff the Cresset Press, London
Douglas M (1982) In the active voice. Routledge & K. Paul, London/Boston
Douglas M (1985) Risk acceptability according to the social sciences. Russell Sage, New York
Douglas M (1986) How Institutions Think, 1st edn. Syracuse University Press, Syracuse
Douglas M (1992) Risk and blame: essays in cultural theory. Routledge, London/New York
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
Douglas M (2003) Being fair to hierarchists. Univ Penn Law Rev 151(4):1349–1370
Douglas M, Wildavsky AB (1982) Risk and culture: an essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers. University of California Press, Berkeley
Ellis RJ, Thompson F (1997) Culture and the environment in the Pacific Northwest. Am Polit Sci Rev 91(4):885–898
Elster J (1985) Making sense of Marx. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
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
Gastil J, Jenkins-Smith H, Silva C (1995) Analysis of cultural bias survey items (Institute for Public Policy, University of New Mexico, 1995)
Giner-Sorolla R, Chaiken S (1997) Selective use of heuristic and systematic processing under defense motivation. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 23(1):84–97
Gross JL, Rayner S (1985) Measuring culture: a paradigm for the analysis of social organization. Columbia University Press, New York
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
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
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
Kahan DM (2007) The cognitively illiberal state. Stan L Rev 60:115–154
Kahan DM (2010) Emotion in risk regulation: competing theories. In: Roeser S (ed) Emotions and risky technologies. Springer, Dordrecht
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
Kahan DM, Braman D (2003b) More statistics, less persuasion: a cultural theory of gun-risk perceptions. Univ Pann Law Rev 151:1291–1327
Kahan DM, Braman D (2006) Cultural cognition of public policy. Yale J L & Pub Pol'y 24:147–170
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
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
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
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
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
Kahan DM, Jenkins-Smith HC, Braman D (2011) Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. J Risk Res 14:147–74
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
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
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
Mamadouh V (1999) Grid-group cultural theory: an introduction. GeoJournal 47:395–409
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
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
Nisbett RE (2003) The geography of thought: how Asians and Westerners think differently–and why. Free Press, New York
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
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
Rayner S (1992) Cultural theory and risk analysis. In: Krimsky S, Golding D (eds) Social theories of risk. Praeger, Westport, pp 83–115
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
Slovic, P (2000) The Perception of Risk. Earthscan Publications, London/Sterling, VA
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
Sjöberg L (1998b) World views, political attitudes, and risk perception. Risk Health Saf Environ 9:137–152
Thompson M, Ellis R, Wildavsky A (1990) Cultural theory. Westview Press, Boulder
Verweij M, Thompson M (eds) (2006) Clumsy solutions for a complex world: governance, politics, and plural perceptions. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills/Basingstoke/Hampshire/New York
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
Wildavsky AB (1991) The rise of radical egalitarianism. American University Press, Washington, DC
Wildavsky A, Dake K (1990) Theories of risk perception: who fears what and why? Daedalus 114:41–60
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
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights 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
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1433-5_28
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1432-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1433-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and Law