Cited by 426

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Risk: From perception to social representation

Joffe, Hélène·2003·British Journal of Social Psychology

Abstract

This paper is concerned with how people make meaning of the risks they face. It explores certain assumptions of the risk perception approaches, which dominate the area. It argues that despite changes currently taking place in the field, such models still focus on static, intrapersonal processes, with many viewing human thinking as analogous to erroneous information processing. In the place of an individual ‘deficit’ focus, the paper proposes a more intersubjective theory of the response to risk. Social representations theory is evaluated and its validity assessed by highlighting empirical work on representations of biotechnological and health risks. The review reveals that the response to risk is a highly social, emotive and symbolic entity. Therefore a theory and methods appropriate to such qualities are proposed, to produce a valid psychology of risk.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1348/014466603763276126

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Joffe, H.
Venue
British Journal of Social Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-03
Volume
42
Issue
1
Pages
55-73
ISSN
  • 0144-6665
  • 2044-8309
Cited by
426
References
2
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