The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Risk: a sociological theory
Abstract
A great deal of attention has been devoted to risk research. Sociologists in general have limited themselves to varying recognitions of a society at risk and have traced out the paths to disaster. The detailed research has yet to be undertaken. In Risk, now available in paperback, Niklas Luhmann develops a theoretical program for such research. His premise is that the concept of risk projects essential aspects of our description of the future onto the present. Risk is conceived as the possibility of triggering unexpected, unlikely, and detrimental consequences by means of a decision attributable to a decision maker.
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
Loebbecke, C., & Picot, A. (2015) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2015.08.002 · Cited by 1,317
Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2002) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/1539-6924.00274 · Cited by 668
New games, new rules: big data and the changing context of strategy
Constantiou, I. D., & Kallinikos, J. (2015) · Journal of Information Technology · doi:10.1057/jit.2014.17 · Cited by 526
Beck, U. (1996) · Theory, Culture & Society · doi:10.1177/0263276496013004001 · Cited by 397
Debtfare States and the Poverty Industry: Money, discipline and the surplus population
Soederberg, S. (2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315761954 · Cited by 380
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 1993-12-01
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 04
- Pages
- 31-2392-31-2392
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W2117321267
- Cited by
- 1,252
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- 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: Risk: a sociological theory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.31-2392
- The paper
- Risk: a sociological theory. (1993). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.31-2392
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.
