The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical Study
Abstract
This study examines a key component of environmental risk communication; trust and credibility. The study was conducted in two parts. In the first part, six hypotheses regarding the perceptions and determinants of trust and credibility were tested against survey data. The hypotheses were supported by the data. The most important hypothesis was that perceptions of trust and credibility are dependent on three factors: perceptions of knowledge and expertise; perceptions of openness and honesty; and perceptions of concern and care. In the second part, models were constructed with perceptions of trust and credibility as the dependent variable. The goal was to examine the data for findings with direct policy implications. One such finding was that defying a negative stereotype is key to improving perceptions of trust and credibility.
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
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
Slovic, P. (1987) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.3563507 · Cited by 9,271
Cited by
Addressing the vaccine confidence gap
Larson, H. J., Cooper, L. Z., Eskola, J., Katz, S. L., & Ratzan, S. (2011) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(11)60678-8 · Cited by 853
Exploring the Dimensionality of Trust in Risk Regulation
Poortinga, W., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2003) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/1539-6924.00373 · Cited by 721
The Effect of Transparency on Trust in Government: A Cross‐National Comparative Experiment
Grimmelikhuijsen, S., Porumbescu, G., Hong, B., & Im, T. (2013) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.12047 · Cited by 608
Grimmelikhuijsen, S. G., & Meijer, A. J. (2014) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/mus048 · Cited by 678
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
Metadata
- Authors
- Peters, R. G., Covello, V. T., & McCallum, D. B.
- Venue
- Risk Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1997-02
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 43-54
- ISSN
- 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-6924
- OpenAlex
- W2158890459
- Cited by
- 751
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 33.62
- 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: The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1997.tb00842.x
- The paper
- Peters, R. G., Covello, V. T., & McCallum, D. B. (1997). The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical Study. Risk Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1997.tb00842.x
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.
