The Perception of Risk By: Cleo Arnold, Stefanie Galich, & Allison Mitrovich Nickerson, R. S. (2003). Risk and the psychology of prevention, In Psychology and environmental change (pp. 172 – 184). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

“Probabilistic Risk Assessment” Video shows the consequences and risks people’s actions have on global warming Y4Doghttp:// Y4Dog

Risk Assessment People overestimate and underestimate risk - People believe in personal fate or luck over actualities (e.g. being a driver vs. a passenger) People believe positive events are more likely to happen to them and negative events are more likely to happen to others

Problems in Quantifying Risk Frequency-of- Incidence: Used to determine the probability of an event happening -- Basis for risk estimates (e.g. insurance agencies) -- Problems: Can’t be used to measure low frequency events or events that have never occurred (e.g. accidental dose of a lethal virus, or peak oil) Some risks are unknown or debatable --Experts frequently disagree about environmental issues (e.g. what is the actual risk of global warming?)

Experts versus Lay Perceptions of Risk Experts and lay people perceive risks different compared to the actual riskiness reflected in incidence statistics - Availability Heuristic causes people to judge risks more severely when they readily come to mind -People often ignore paper statistics and think that “sensational” events (media), are more likely to occur than they actually are

“Flying – Classic Case of Risk Perception” Shows how the media reports only sensational events, so lay people associate large risks with events that are not high-risk. iz-hghttp:// iz-hg

Continued… Holding a positive or negative view will affect a persons attitude -e.g. If you have a favorable attitude toward a nuclear power plant you are more likely to see the benefits of that nuclear power plant; ex. Increase in jobs and cheaper power source

Limitations of Expert Opinion Experts disagree amongst themselves -Confirmation bias -Credibility of expert -Experts can sometimes be wrong!

Fallibility of Predictive Behavior Expert’s predict the effects a modification in a policy would cause This is important because people cannot foresee the consequences of some actions –DDT’s and CFC’s It is easier to see the positive effects of events than it is to see problems with those events –Automobiles and dams

Communication of Risk People ignore statistics and form bad perceptions Experts need to effectively assess risk and communicate correct information to lay people Esp. important to communicate with people at immediate risk because they under-react to the level of risk, ex: –The Three Mile Island incident –Mt. Saint Helens

Human Response to Risk People do not respond appropriately to risk; an “appropriate” response is acting consistent with one’s own self-interest. People engage in high-risk behavior while avoiding situations that pose smaller threats  form subjective perceptions of risk Subjective perception influenced by: personal values, social influences, etc… “Framing Effect” -- people make choices between different alternatives based on how the outcome possibilities are described (“framed”) to them.

Humans Response to Risk Solution: –Increase communication between experts and lay people –Establish procedures and standards that the general public can understand –Make the risk data as relevant to lay people as possible

The Psychology of Prevention Prevention is more cost-effective than clean-up or a cure –Need to create and sustain public enthusiasm about prevention of environmental problems Difficult to sustain preventative measures: people may think the prevention was unnecessary and the event would not have occurred in the first place

So… People need to pay attention and accept the actual statistics and the opinions of experts!!! BE AWARE!!!

Interesting Points The fact that people who are in immediate risk situations underestimate their actual level of risk The book actually described one source of incorrect risk perceptions: the media!! The fact that they broadcast events that do not occur very often, while ignoring those events that viewers are most at risk to The author actually questioned the credibility of experts and explained how experts can actually be incorrect in their predictions

Critical Review The chapter identified problems with risk assessment and risk perception, but failed to give any solutions or scientific methods to prevent them Although the chapter acknowledged problems with human perception of risk being subjective, it did not identify the specific influences that form people’s perceptions The author spewed out facts and cited a ton of other studies, but did not go into detail about any of the topics presented.

Questions How do you think a person can properly assess risk? What other ways can risk psychology help change people’s actions concerning the environment and peak oil? Do you think a class (possibly in high school or college) would be beneficial to helping people understand and interpret risk correctly? –What would the outcome of educating people about risk in this manner be?