Cross-Cultural Differences in Risk Perceptions of Disasters
Abstract
Public risk perceptions of mass disasters carry considerable influences, both psychologically and economically, despite their oft-times imprecise nature. Prior research has identified the presence of an optimistic bias that affects risk perception, but there is a dearth of literature examining how these perceptions differ among cultures-particularly with regard to mass disasters. The present study explores differences among Japanese, Argentinean, and North American mental health workers in their rates of the optimistic bias in risk perceptions as contrasted between natural disasters and terrorist events. The results indicate a significant difference among cultures in levels of perceived risk that do not correspond to actual exposure rates. Japanese groups had the highest risk perceptions for both types of hazards and North Americans and Argentineans had the lowest risk perceptions for terrorism. Additionally, participants across all cultures rated risk to self as lower than risk to others (optimistic bias) across all disaster types. These findings suggest that cultural factors may have a greater influence on risk perception than social exposure, and that the belief that one is more immune to disasters compared to others may be a cross-cultural phenomenon.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Culture has an impact on risk perceptions among different culture groups.
“Several studies have shown that culture has an impact on risk perceptions among different culture groups [38,49].”
From A Cross-Cultural Comparison of an Extended Planned Risk Information Seeking Model on Mental Health Among College Students: Cross-Sectional Study (2020) · cites this paper as [49]
Cites
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984 · see citing works
Risk Perception in Poland: A Comparison with three other countries
Goszczynska, M., Tyszka, T., & Slovlc, P. (1991) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.3960040305 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Investigating tourists' risk information processing
Aliperti, G., & Cruz, A. M. (2019) · Annals of Tourism Research · doi:10.1016/j.annals.2019.102803 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
The ripple of fear, sympathy and solidarity during the Boston bombings
Lin, Y.-R., & Margolin, D. (2014) · EPJ Data Science · doi:10.1140/epjds/s13688-014-0031-z · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Niu, Z., Willoughby, J. F., Mei, J., Li, S., & Hu, P. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/15817 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- Gierlach, E., Belsher, B. E., & Beutler, L. E.
- Affiliations
- Palo Alto University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gierlach, Elaine
- ORCID
- Belsher, Bradley E.
- Venue
- Risk Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-07-12
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1539-1549
- ISSN
- 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2138878894
- Cited by
- 237
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 20.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Risk Analysis (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- risk perception, cross-cultural comparison, optimism bias, mass disasters, natural disasters, terrorism, mental health professionals, Japanese, North Americans
- MeSH terms
- Argentina, Attitude, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Disasters, Humans, Individuality, Japan, Psychometrics, Social Behavior, United States, Risk Assessment, Terrorism, Uncertainty, Tsunamis
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