The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Quantitative Test of the Cultural Theory of Risk Perceptions: Comparison with the Psychometric Paradigm
Abstract
This paper seeks to compare two frameworks which have been proposed to explain risk perceptions, namely, cultural theory and the psychometric paradigm. A structured questionnaire which incorporated elements from both approaches was administered to 129 residents of Norwich, England. The qualitative risk characteristics generated by the psychometric paradigm explained a far greater proportion of the variance in risk perceptions than cultural biases, though it should be borne in mind that the qualitative characteristics refer directly to risks whereas cultural biases are much more distant variables. Correlations between cultural biases and risk perceptions were very low, but the key point was that each cultural bias was associated with concern about distinct types of risks and that the pattern of responses was compatible with that predicted by cultural theory. The cultural approach also provided indicators for underlying beliefs regarding trust and the environment; beliefs which were consistent within each world view but divergent between them. An important drawback, however, was that the psychometric questionnaire could only allocate 32% of the respondents unequivocally to one of the four cultural types. The rest of the sample expressed several cultural biases simultaneously, or none at all. Cultural biases are therefore probably best interpreted as four extreme world views, and a mixture of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies would generate better insights into who might defend these views in what circumstances, whether there are only four mutually exclusive world views or not, and how these views are related to patterns of social solidarity, and judgments on institutional trust.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits
Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S., & Combs, B. (1978) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf00143739 · Cited by 2,834
The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework
Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H. S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J. X., & Ratick, S. (1988) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01168.x · Cited by 2,740
Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers.
Kingston, P. W., Douglas, M., & Wildavsky, A. (1983) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2067477 · Cited by 2,274
Perceived Risk, Trust, and Democracy
Slovic, P. (1993) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb01329.x · Cited by 1,870
Gender, Race, and Perception of Environmental Health Risks
Flynn, J., Slovic, P., & Mertz, C. K. (1994) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00082.x · Cited by 1,537
Risk acceptability according to the social sciences
Douglas, M. (1986) · Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) · Cited by 1,048
Perception of risk: Reflections on the psychometric paradigm
Slovic, P. (1992) · Scholars' Bank (University of Oregon) · Cited by 699
Peters, E., & Slovic, P. (1996) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1996.tb00079.x · Cited by 644
Dake, K. (1991) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/0022022191221006 · Cited by 613
Myths of Nature: Culture and the Social Construction of Risk
Dake, K. (1992) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1992.tb01943.x · Cited by 574
Cited by
Cultural cognition of scientific consensus.
Kahan, D. M., Jenkins‐Smith, H., & Braman, D. (2011) · Journal of Risk Research · doi:10.1080/13669877.2010.511246 · Cited by 1,686
Determinants of Risk: Exposure and Vulnerability
Cardona, O.-D., van Aalst, M. K., Birkmann, J., Fordham, M., McGregor, G., Perez, R., Pulwarty, R. S., Schipper, E. L. F., Sinh, B. T., Décamps, H., et al. (2012) · Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139177245.005 · Cited by 1,007
Risk perception and volcanic hazard mitigation: Individual and social perspectives
Paton, D., Smith, L., Daly, M., & Johnston, D. (2008) · Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research · doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.12.026 · Cited by 242
Wamsler, C., & Brink, E. (2018) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.029 · Cited by 155
Price, J. C., Walker, I. A., & Boschetti, F. (2014) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.10.001 · Cited by 154
Metadata
- Authors
- Marris, C., Langford, I. H., & O'Riordan, T.
- Venue
- Risk Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-10
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 635-647
- ISSN
- 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2158268787
- Cited by
- 363
- References
- 29
- FWCI
- 27.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Quantitative Test of the Cultural Theory of Risk Perceptions: Comparison with the Psychometric Paradigm. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1023/b:rian.0000005937.60969.32
- The paper
- Marris, C., Langford, I. H., & O'Riordan, T. (1998). A Quantitative Test of the Cultural Theory of Risk Perceptions: Comparison with the Psychometric Paradigm. Risk Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1023/b%3Arian.0000005937.60969.32
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.