The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Perception of Hazards: The Role of Social Trust and Knowledge
Abstract
Recent research indicates that social trust of those who manage a hazard is strongly correlated to judgments about the hazard's risk and benefits. The present study investigates the more specific question of “For which hazards is this?” It was postulated that when an individual lacks knowledge about a hazard, social trust of authorities managing the hazard determines perceived risks and benefits. On the other hand, when an individual has personal knowledge about a hazard and therefore does not need to rely on managing authorities, social trust is unrelated to judged risks and benefits. Participants ( N = 91) assessed risks, benefits, and trust in managing authorities and personal knowledge associated with 25 hazardous technologies and activities. As expected, strong correlations between social trust and judged risks and benefits were observed for hazards about which people did not possess much knowledge. No significant correlations between social trust and judged risks and benefits were found for hazards about which people were knowledgeable. Results suggest that the lay public relies on social trust when making judgments of risks and benefits when personal knowledge about a hazard is lacking. Replicating findings of other studies, the present study also found negative correlations between perceived risks and perceived benefits. When social trust was controlled for, correlations between perceived risks and benefits diminished. Implications of the results for risk management are discussed.
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“This method was consistent with previous risk perception and preparedness studies (e.g., Siegrist and Cvetkovich 2000;Bird et al. 2010).”
From Household preparedness motivation in lahar hazard zones: assessing the adoption of preparedness behaviors among laypeople and response professionals in communities downstream from Mount Baker and Glacier Peak (USA) volcanoes (2017) · cites this paper as Siegrist and Cvetkovich 2000
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
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Boholm, Å. (1998). Comparative studies of risk perception: A re- view of twenty years of research. Journal of Risk Research, 1, 135-163.
- Cvetkovich, G., & Löfstedt, R. (Eds.). (1999). Social trust and the management of risk. London: Earthscan.
- Durant, J., Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (Eds.). (1998). Biotechnol- ogy in the public sphere. London: Science Museum.
- Frewer, L. J., Howard, C., & Shepherd, R. (1996). Effective com- munication about genetic engineering and food. British Food Journal, 98, 48-52.
- Frewer, L. J., Howard, C., & Shepherd, R. (1998). Understanding public attitudes to technology. Journal of Risk Research, 1, 221-235.
- Groothuis, P. A., & Miller, G. (1997). The role of social distrust in risk-benefit analysis: A study of the siting of a hazardous waste disposal facility. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 15, 241-257.
- Siegrist, M. (1999). A causal model explaining the perception and acceptance of gene technology. Journal of Applied Social Psy- chology, 29, 2093-2106.
- Sjöberg, L. (1999). Perceived competence and motivation in indus- try and government in risk perception. In G. Cvetkovich & R. E. Löfstedt (Eds.), Social trust and the management of risk (pp. 89-99). London: Earthscan.
- Slovic, P. (1997). Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science. In M. H. Bazerman, D. M. Messick, A. E. Tenbrunsel, & K. A. Wade- Benzoni (Eds.), Environment, ethics, and behavior (pp. 277- 313). San Francisco: The New Lexington Press.
- Stine, R. A. (1997). AXIS: An extensible graphical user interface for statistics. In R. Stine & J. Fox (Eds.), Statistical computing environments for social research (pp. 175-192). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cited by
The Role of Public Trust During Pandemics: Implications for Crisis Communication
Siegrist, M., & Zingg, A. (2014) · European Psychologist · doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000169 · Cited by 420
Self-citationExpert and public perception of risk from biotechnology
Savadori, L., Savio, S., Nicotra, E., Rumiati, R., Finucane, M., & Slovic, P. (2004) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00526.x · Cited by 341
Luo, M., Hancock, J. T., & Markowitz, D. M. (2022) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650220921321 · Cited by 245
Public understanding of solar radiation management
Mercer, A. M., Keith, D. W., & Sharp, J. D. (2011) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/044006 · Cited by 160
Collins, T. W., Grineski, S. E., & Chakraborty, J. (2018) · Regional Environmental Change · doi:10.1007/s10113-017-1121-9 · Cited by 126
The effect of food shape abnormality on purchase intentions in China
Loebnitz, N., & Grunert, K. G. (2015) · Food Quality and Preference · doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.08.005 · Cited by 103
Matin, A. H., Goddard, E., Vandermoere, F., Blanchemanche, S., Bieberstein, A., Marette, S., & Roosen, J. (2012) · International Journal of Consumer Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011.01090.x · Cited by 96
Toward thick legitimacy: Creating a web of legitimacy for agroecology
Montenegro de Wit, M., & Iles, A. (2016) · Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene · doi:10.12952/journal.elementa.000115 · Cited by 91
Wu, W., Huang, Y., & Qian, L. (2024) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2023.114115 · Cited by 73
Public attitudes toward nanotechnology applications in Taiwan
Chen, M.-F., Lin, Y.-P., & Cheng, T.-J. (2013) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2012.11.008 · Cited by 72
Social perception of systemic risks
Schweizer, P., Goble, R., & Renn, O. (2022) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.13831 · Cited by 63
Quantifying the trustworthiness of social media content
Moturu, S. T., & Liu, H. (2011) · Distributed and Parallel Databases · doi:10.1007/s10619-010-7077-0 · Cited by 56
Sanz-Menéndez, L., & Cruz-Castro, L. (2019) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/0963662519840946 · Cited by 47
Corwin, K. A., Brand, B. D., Hubbard, M. L., & Johnston, D. M. (2017) · Journal of Applied Volcanology · doi:10.1186/s13617-017-0055-8 · Cited by 31
Risk perception, trust and support for wildlife reintroduction and conservation.
Watkins, C. E., Poudyal, N. C., Jones, R. E., Muller, L. I., & Hodges, D. G. (2021) · Environmental Conservation · doi:10.1017/s0376892921000011 · Cited by 30
Jeong, J.-S., & Kim, S. Y. (2024) · Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10410236.2023.2166698 · Cited by 27
Sheen, G. C.-H., Tung, H. H., & Wu, W.-C. (2021) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0260961 · Cited by 17
Camargo, J. P., Guevara-Corzo, J., & Torres-Peña, J. A. (2026) · Urban Science · doi:10.3390/urbansci10100603
Metadata
- Authors
- Siegrist, M., & Cvetkovich, G.
- Venue
- Risk Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-10
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 713-720
- ISSN
- 0272-4332
- 1539-6924
- Cited by
- 1,111
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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
