• Home
• Lessons
  • 1. Basic Concepts in Risk Communication
  • 2. Risk Perception, Behavior and Acceptance
  • 3. Risk Communication and Plant Protection
  • 4. Communicating Risk: Who, How, When, Where and How Often
  • 5. Module Case Study
• Topics
  • 1. Risk Perception
  • 2. Risk Acceptance and Behavior
  • 3. Lesson Summary
  • 4. Lesson Assessment
• Resources
  • Help
  • Glossary
  • Documents
  • Acknowledgements

Lesson 2: Risk Perception, Behavior and Acceptance

Topic 1: Risk Perception

Before beginning any discussion about risk perception, it is important to understand that there is no such thing as “true” or “absolute” risk. Risk is essentially a social construction, a way of adding meaning to how we think about our relationships to the environment around us. 

What accounts for these differences? Why do people often perceive the same risk so differently? Experts have often assumed that such differences are primarily the result of ignorance or a lack of technical understanding by the general public. If this were the case, the solution would be simply to provide more information to the general public. Risk communication would then be a process whereby an audience is persuaded by experts that the risks associated with a given activity are small, large or easily managed, and that decision making should be left entirely to those who (presumably) know best. Experience has shown that this risk communication method tends to be unsuccessful. The reason for this is that the factors influencing how people interpret and evaluate risk information (in other words, how they construct risk) are much more complex than the simple “lack of information” explanation implies.

Rank the following activities and technologies by dragging them into the order of their “riskiness”, with the first being the most risky and the last the least risky. Which activities are at the top of your list?

• Bicycles
• Commercial Aviation
• Electric Power (Non-Nuclear)
• Fire Fighting
• Food Preservatives
• Motor Vehicles
• Motorcycles
• Mountain Climbing
• Contraceptives
• Nuclear Power
• Pesticides
• Police Work
• Prescription Antibiotics
• Alcoholic Beverages
• Railroads
• Smoking Cigarettes
• Surgery
• Swimming
• Vaccinations
• Medical X-Rays

A study conducted in the United States asked several groups of people to rank the risk of various activities and technologies. The table below is adapted from that study. It shows how three separate groups ranked each hazard: experts, university students, and members of the League of Women Voters. The League of Women Voters is an American civic organization and advocacy group which is made up predominately of women and which focuses on political issues of importance to women. The ordering in the table below is based on the average rank within each group. Rank 1 represents what was perceived to be the most risky activity or technology.

Activity or Technology	Experts	University Students	League of Women Voters
Motor Vehicles	1	5	2
Smoking	2	2	3
Alcoholic Beverages	3	6	5
Surgery	4	10	8
Motorcycles	5	5	4
X-rays	6	13	16
Pesticides	7	3	7
Electrical Power	8	14	13
Swimming	9	20	14
Contraceptives	10	8	15
Food preservatives	11	11	18
Bicycles	12	18	11
Commercial Aviation	13	12	12
Police Work	14	7	6
Fire fighting	15	9	9
Railroads	16	17	17
Nuclear power	17	1	1
Prescription antibiotics	18	15	19
Vaccinations	19	19	20
Mountain climbing	20	16	10

How Do People Assess Risk?

As mentioned previously, risk is essentially a social construction. In order to make sense of the world around us, we continually conduct personal risk assessments on the various hazards we face each day. Most of the time, these assessments are informal, and we might not even be aware that we are making them, let alone paying attention to the factors that are influencing our evaluations. We assess risk according to our perceptions of risk. It helps to think of risk perception and, hence, risk construction as having two dimensions. We will call the first dimension the "scientific risk". It is based on estimating the likelihood of an occurrence and calculating the costs and benefits associated with the potential consequences of the occurrence. To scientists and experts, scientific risk is objective and measurable, although it is important to note that even this dimension of risk assessment involves the use of judgment and perception.

We will call the second dimension of risk assessment "intuitive risk". Intuitive risk is based on subjective emotional factors, many of which we are not always aware. It reflects our personal experiences and situations and is highly influenced by context. Some of the factors that influence our intuitive evaluation of risk include the following.

It is important to accept intuitive risk factors not as distortions but as a normal part of risk perception. Our personal assessment of risk consists of our evaluations of both scientific and intuitive risk. At least to some degree, both dimensions of risk are influenced by cultural and ethnic values, biases, societal norms, economic interests, and past experiences. There is a tendency for the public to pay too much attention to intuitive risk, and for experts to pay too little attention to it. 

Thinking back to your answers earlier, which dimension of risk perception (scientific risk or personally perceived risk) did you primarily use (consciously or subconsciously) to assess the risk of each hazard? Which (if any) of the intuitive risk factors listed above played a part?

To continue, select Topic 2 from the Topics menu above or click here.