The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Feeling of Risk: New Perspectives on Risk Perception
Abstract
'To understand how people deal with risk, you have to begin with the psychology of risk. To understand the psychology of risk, you have to begin with the work of Paul Slovic. This book is fundamental: Anyone concerned with risk in any of its various and shifting forms absolutely must read it.'-Dan Gardner, author of Risk: The Science and Politics of Fear
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
Cited by
Identity change, uncertainty and mistrust in relation to fear and risk of COVID-19
Breakwell, G. M., & Jaspal, R. (2021) · Journal of Risk Research · doi:10.1080/13669877.2020.1864011 · Cited by 104
Perceptions of enhanced weathering as a biological negative emissions option
Pidgeon, N. F., & Spence, E. (2017) · Biology Letters · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2017.0024 · Cited by 46
Binder, A. R., Hillback, E. D., & Brossard, D. (2016) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.12462 · Cited by 38
Saifudin, I. M. M. Y. (2023) · Journal of Community Empowerment for Health · doi:10.22146/jcoemph.86343 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Slovic, P., & Ball, D. J.
- Venue
- Energy & Environment
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-08
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 835-836
- ISSN
- 0958-305X (ISSN-L)
- 2048-4070
- OpenAlex
- W2076570270
- Cited by
- 456
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 72.87
- 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 Feeling of Risk: New Perspectives on Risk Perception. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1260/0958-305x.22.6.835
- The paper
- Slovic, P., & Ball, D. J. (2011). The Feeling of Risk: New Perspectives on Risk Perception. Energy & Environment. https://doi.org/10.1260/0958-305x.22.6.835
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.
