The risk concept—historical and recent development trends
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
A Disciplinary Perspective on the Epistemological Status of Risk
Althaus, C. E. (2005) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00625.x · Cited by 286 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation
Aven, T. (2016) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.023 · Cited by 1,713 · see citing works
“Arguments for seeing beyond expected values and probabilities in defining and describing risk are summarised in Aven (2012 , 2015c ); see also Section 4 .”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationWangen, G., Hallstensen, C., & Snekkenes, E. (2018) · International Journal of Information Security · doi:10.1007/s10207-017-0382-0 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
In support of “no-fault” civil liability rules for artificial intelligence
Marchisio, E. (2021) · SN Social Sciences · doi:10.1007/s43545-020-00043-z · Cited by 25 · see citing works
“…been studied thoroughly and scholars have come to the conclusion that intrinsically risky activities incorporate a certain percentage of risk that does not depend on the person performing them but on the activities themselves (Althaus 2005; Aldred 2013; Aven 2012, 2016; Beck 1996; Lindley 2006).”
Background
- Authors
- Aven, T.
- Affiliations
- University of Stavanger (NO)
- Corresponding author
- Aven, Terje
- ORCID
- Aven, Terje
- Venue
- Reliability Engineering & System Safety
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-03
- Volume
- 99
- Pages
- 33-44
- ISSN
- 0951-8320 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1989894308
- Cited by
- 596
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 57 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 18.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Reliability Engineering & System Safety (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Risk and Safety Analysis
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Leadership, Behavior, and Decision-Making Studies
- Keywords
- risk concept, risk definition, history of risk, expected value, uncertainty, risk assessment, risk management, conceptual development
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
