CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The temporal dynamics of public attention to aviation safety events

Sun, Jialong, Dou, Zhi, Gao, Yi·2026·Journal of Safety Research
DOI 10.1016/j.jsr.2026.05.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsr.2026.05.003

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 52

  1. Alrawad, 2022, Perception of occupational and environmental risks and hazards among mineworkers: A psychometric paradigm approach, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 3371, 10.3390/ijerph19063371 · DOI
  2. Balog-Way, 2020, The evolving field of risk communication, Risk Analysis, 40, 2240, 10.1111/risa.13615 · DOI
  3. Bessi, 2015, Science vs conspiracy: Collective narratives in the age of misinformation, PLoS One1, 10
  4. Bruckmaier, 2020, Attention and capacity limits in perception: A cellular metabolism account, The Journal of Neuroscience, 40, 6801, 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2368-19.2020 · DOI
  5. Cha, 2000, Risk perception in Korea: An application of psychometric paradigm, International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 1, 42, 10.1504/IJRAM.2000.001487 · DOI
  6. Chung, 2011, Social amplification of risk in the internet environment, Risk Analysis, 31, 1883, 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01623.x · DOI
  7. Crane, 2008, Robust dynamic classes revealed by measuring the response function of a social system, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 15649, 10.1073/pnas.0803685105 · DOI
  8. Czaika, 2022, Why do people stay put in environmentally stressful regions? Cognitive bias and heuristics in migration decision-making, Regional Environmental Change, 22, 84, 10.1007/s10113-022-01934-y · DOI
  9. Dai, 2024, Sentiment-topic dynamic collaborative analysis-based public opinion mapping in aviation disaster management: A case study of the MU5735 air crash, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 102, 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104268 · DOI · Paper page
  10. De Domenico, 2020, Unraveling the origin of social bursts in collective attention, Scientific Reports, 10, 4629, 10.1038/s41598-020-61523-z · DOI
  11. Dickey, 1979, Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 427, 10.1080/01621459.1979.10482531 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Downer, 2010, Trust and technology: The social foundations of aviation regulation, The British Journal of Sociology, 61, 83, 10.1111/j.1468-4446.2009.01303.x · DOI
  13. Fischhoff, 1978, How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits, Policy Sciences, 9, 127, 10.1007/BF00143739 · DOI
  14. Fleischer, 2012, The impact of fear of flying on travellers’ flight choice: Choice model with latent variables, Journal of Travel Research, 51, 653, 10.1177/0047287512437856 · DOI
  15. Fox-Glassman, 2016, What makes risk acceptable? Revisiting the 1978 psychological dimensions of perceptions of technological risks, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 75, 157, 10.1016/j.jmp.2016.05.003 · DOI
  16. Gao, 2015, Safety climate of a commercial airline: A cross-sectional comparison of four occupational groups, Journal of Air Transport Management, 47, 162, 10.1016/j.jairtraman.2015.05.010 · DOI
  17. García-Gavilanes, 2016, Dynamics and biases of online attention: The case of aircraft crashes, Royal Society Open Science, 3, 10.1098/rsos.160460 · DOI
  18. Gaskell, 2004, GM foods and the misperception of risk perception, Risk Analysis, 24, 185, 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00421.x · DOI
  19. Gstraunthaler, 2008, Avian influenza in the UK: Knowledge, risk perception and risk reduction strategies, British Food Journal, 110, 260, 10.1108/00070700810858673 · DOI
  20. Hölzl, 2025, The (mis)use of Google Trends data in the social sciences—A systematic review, critique, and recommendations, Social Science Research, 126, 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2024.103099 · DOI
  21. Kasperson, 1988, The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework, Risk Analysis, 8, 177, 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01168.x · DOI · Paper page
  22. Keller, 2006, The role of the affect and availability heuristics in risk communication, Risk Analysis, 26, 631, 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00773.x · DOI · Paper page
  23. Koonce, 2005, How do investors judge the risk of financial items?, The Accounting Review, 80, 221, 10.2308/accr.2005.80.1.221 · DOI
  24. Kwiatkowski, 1992, Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root, Journal of Econometrics, 54, 159, 10.1016/0304-4076(92)90104-Y · DOI · Paper page
  25. Larson, 2022, Vaccines and the social amplification of risk, Risk Analysis, 42, 1409, 10.1111/risa.13942 · DOI
  26. Li, 2015, The effects of aviation accidents on public perception toward an airline, Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies
  27. Manning, 2025, Food safety management systems: The role of cognitive and cultural biases in determining what is ‘safe enough., Trends in Food Science & Technology, 156, 10.1016/j.tifs.2024.104811 · DOI
  28. Marcaccioli, 2022, Exogenous and endogenous price jumps belong to different dynamical classes, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2022, 10.1088/1742-5468/ac498c · DOI
  29. Miritello, 2013, Time as a limited resource: Communication strategy in mobile phone networks, Social Networks, 35, 89, 10.1016/j.socnet.2013.01.003 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Pachur, 2012, How do people judge risks: Availability heuristic, affect heuristic, or both?, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 18, 314
  31. Pashler, 1994, Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory, Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220, 10.1037/0033-2909.116.2.220 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Pesaran, 2001, Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16, 289, 10.1002/jae.616 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Phillips, 1988, Testing for a unit root in time series regression, Biometrika, 75, 335, 10.1093/biomet/75.2.335 · DOI
  34. Renn, 1992, The social amplification of risk: Theoretical foundations and empirical applications, Journal of Social Issues, 48, 137, 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1992.tb01949.x · DOI
  35. Wall, 2019, Boeing crash fallout spreads as more 737 MAX jets are Idled, The Wall Street Journal
  36. Sasahara, 2013, Quantifying collective attention from tweet stream, PLoS One1, 8
  37. Schwarz, 1991, Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability heuristic, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 195, 10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.195 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Shiwakoti, 2022, Passengers’ perception of safety and its relationship with demographics, service quality, satisfaction and loyalty in airlines sector—A case study of Vietnam to Australia route, Transport Policy, 124, 194, 10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.04.029 · DOI
  39. Shrestha, 2018, Selecting appropriate methodological framework for time series data analysis, The Journal of Finance and Data Science, 4, 71, 10.1016/j.jfds.2017.11.001 · DOI
  40. Shteynberg, 2018, A collective perspective: Shared attention and the mind, Current Opinion in Psychology, 23, 93, 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.12.007 · DOI
  41. Simon, H. A. (1971). Designing organizations for an information-rich world (pp. 38–72). Computers, Communication, and the Public Interest (edited by M. Greenberger).
  42. Siomkos, 2000, Managing airline disasters, Journal of Air Transport Management, 6, 101, 10.1016/S0969-6997(99)00030-7 · DOI
  43. Slovic, 1987, Perception of risk, Science, 236, 280, 10.1126/science.3563507 · DOI · Paper page
  44. Toda, 1995, Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes, Journal of Econometrics, 66, 225, 10.1016/0304-4076(94)01616-8 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Tversky, 1973, Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability, Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207, 10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Van Der Meer, 2019, Mediatization and the disproportionate attention to negative news: The case of airplane crashes, Journalism Studies, 20, 783, 10.1080/1461670X.2018.1423632 · DOI
  47. Verma, 2022, Examining the impact of sharing COVID-19 misinformation online on mental health, Scientific Reports, 12, 8045, 10.1038/s41598-022-11488-y · DOI
  48. Wahlberg, 2000, Risk perception and the media, Journal of Risk Research, 3, 31, 10.1080/136698700376699 · DOI · Paper page
  49. Wu, 2007, Novelty and collective attention, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104, 17599, 10.1073/pnas.0704916104 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Wu, 2022, Classification of endogenous and exogenous bursts in collective emotions based on Weibo comments during COVID-19, Scientific Reports, 12, 3120, 10.1038/s41598-022-07067-w · DOI
  51. Yeo, 2020, Emotions in social media: an analysis of tweet responses to MH370 search suspension announcement, International Journal of Business Communication, 57, 194, 10.1177/2329488419882755 · DOI
  52. Zimmermann, 2024, Approaches to improve preprocessing for Latent Dirichlet Allocation topic modeling, Decision Support Systems, 185, 10.1016/j.dss.2024.114310 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Sun, J., Dou, Z., & Gao, Y.
Venue
Journal of Safety Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2026-06
Volume
97
Pages
598-611
ISSN
0022-4375
DOI
10.1016/j.jsr.2026.05.003
Cited by
1
References
2
Language
en
Licence

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