Effects of heat stress on risk perceptions and risk taking
Abstract
Exposure to extreme heat at work is a serious occupational hazard, as exposure can result in heat-related illnesses, and it has been linked to increased risk of accidents and injuries. The current study aimed to examine whether heat exposure is related to changes in individuals' psychological process of risk evaluation, and whether acclimatization can mitigate the effect of heat exposure. A study with quasi-experiment research design was used to compare participants' risk perceptions and risk-taking behaviors at baseline, initial exposure to heat, and exposure after acclimatization across male participants who were exposed to heat (N = 6), and males (N = 5) and females (N = 6) who were in the control group who were exposed to ambient temperature. Results show that participants perceived the same risky behaviors to be less risky (p = 0.003) and demonstrated increased risk-taking behaviors (p = 0.001) after initial heat exposure. While their risk perceptions returned to baseline level after acclimatization, their risk-taking behaviors remained heightened (p = 0.031). Participants who were not exposed to heat showed no significant fluctuation in their risk perceptions and risk-taking. Our findings support that risk-related processes may explain the effects of heat exposure on increased accidents and injuries beyond its direct impact on heat-related illnesses.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Heightened impulsivity and risk-taking behaviours are driven by warmer temperatures, leading to increased work errors.
“Heightened impulsivity and risk-taking behaviours are driven by warmer temperatures, leading to increased work errors.10,11”
From Influence of habitual physical activity on cognitive performance of healthy young adults after passive heat exposure (2026) · cites this paper as [10]
Cites
Anderson, C. A. (2001) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00109 · Cited by 424 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Zhuo, F., Gaurani, R. J., Low, I. C. C., Deshayes, T. A., Lee, J. K. W., Cheung, S. S., Choo, P. L., & Tan, X. R. (2026) · Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness · doi:10.1016/j.jesf.2025.200436 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Chang, C.-H., Bernard, T. E., & Logan, J.
- Affiliations
- Michigan State University (US)
- University of South Florida (US)
- Corresponding author
- Chang, Chu-Hsiang
- Venue
- Applied Ergonomics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-07
- Volume
- 62
- Pages
- 150-157
- ISSN
- 0003-6870 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2604242268
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 2.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Applied Ergonomics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (T42 OH 008438)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Thermoregulation and physiological responses
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Radiological and Ultrasound Technology › Occupational Health and Safety Research
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
- Keywords
- heat stress, occupational heat exposure, risk perception, risk-taking, risk assessment, acclimatization, occupational hazards, gender differences
- MeSH terms
- Acclimatization, Adult, Female, Hot Temperature, Humans, Male, Perception, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Risk-Taking, Risk Assessment, Heat Stress Disorders, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review