Institutional trust, risk and product safety: a consumer survey

IF 2.4 4区 管理学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Journal of Risk Research Pub Date : 2023-05-09 DOI:10.1080/13669877.2023.2204875
Zoe Adams, Magda Osman
{"title":"Institutional trust, risk and product safety: a consumer survey","authors":"Zoe Adams, Magda Osman","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2204875","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study aims to expand our understanding of institutional trust by examining how consumers express their trust in a UK product safety regulator, the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS). It uses publicly available data from two waves of nationally representative surveys (N = 20,526) conducted by OPSS between November 2020 and August 2021. Questions were selected for analysis if they aligned with the organisation’s definition of a trusted regulator: protecting people and places, and empowering people to make good choices. Of the 211 survey items in Wave 1 and 150 in Wave 2, 42 pairs of questions were selected. Only nine of the 42 analyses were statistically significant, and of those only two were interpretable at a reliable statistical threshold (i.e. medium effect size threshold). The results are valuable in demonstrating how institutional trust may be affected by product safety-related behaviours, experiences, beliefs and attitudes concerning the risks to which consumers are potentially exposed. However, the general lack of reliable findings also highlights methodological challenges in the way official government surveys investigate institutional trust, risk, and general product safety issues on both a linguistic and conceptual level. By examining the survey results and the survey itself, we show how empirical and theoretical insights can inform government efforts to capture important phenomena.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"26 1","pages":"648 - 674"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Risk Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2204875","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This study aims to expand our understanding of institutional trust by examining how consumers express their trust in a UK product safety regulator, the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS). It uses publicly available data from two waves of nationally representative surveys (N = 20,526) conducted by OPSS between November 2020 and August 2021. Questions were selected for analysis if they aligned with the organisation’s definition of a trusted regulator: protecting people and places, and empowering people to make good choices. Of the 211 survey items in Wave 1 and 150 in Wave 2, 42 pairs of questions were selected. Only nine of the 42 analyses were statistically significant, and of those only two were interpretable at a reliable statistical threshold (i.e. medium effect size threshold). The results are valuable in demonstrating how institutional trust may be affected by product safety-related behaviours, experiences, beliefs and attitudes concerning the risks to which consumers are potentially exposed. However, the general lack of reliable findings also highlights methodological challenges in the way official government surveys investigate institutional trust, risk, and general product safety issues on both a linguistic and conceptual level. By examining the survey results and the survey itself, we show how empirical and theoretical insights can inform government efforts to capture important phenomena.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
机构信任、风险与产品安全:一项消费者调查
摘要本研究旨在通过研究消费者如何表达他们对英国产品安全监管机构——产品安全与标准办公室(OPSS)的信任,扩大我们对机构信任的理解。它使用了OPSS在2020年11月至2021年8月期间进行的两波全国代表性调查(N = 20,526)的公开数据。如果问题符合该组织对可信赖监管者的定义:保护人员和场所,并赋予人们做出正确选择的权力,就会被选中进行分析。在第一波211个调查项目和第二波150个调查项目中,选择了42对问题。42项分析中只有9项具有统计显著性,其中只有2项在可靠的统计阈值(即中等效应大小阈值)下可解释。这些结果在展示机构信任如何受到与产品安全有关的行为、经验、信念和态度的影响方面是有价值的,这些行为、经验、信念和态度涉及消费者可能面临的风险。然而,普遍缺乏可靠的调查结果也突出了官方政府调查在语言和概念层面上调查机构信任、风险和一般产品安全问题的方法上的挑战。通过研究调查结果和调查本身,我们展示了经验和理论见解如何为政府捕捉重要现象的努力提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Risk Research
Journal of Risk Research SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: The Journal of Risk Research is an international journal that publishes peer-reviewed theoretical and empirical research articles within the risk field from the areas of social, physical and health sciences and engineering, as well as articles related to decision making, regulation and policy issues in all disciplines. Articles will be published in English. The main aims of the Journal of Risk Research are to stimulate intellectual debate, to promote better risk management practices and to contribute to the development of risk management methodologies. Journal of Risk Research is the official journal of the Society for Risk Analysis Europe and the Society for Risk Analysis Japan.
期刊最新文献
How is counterfactual thinking integrated in organizational risk and resilience practices? Growing utopia – undoing risk through self-sufficiency and urban gardening? Improving workplace safety through mindful organizing: participative safety self-efficacy as a mediational link between collective mindfulness and employees’ safety citizenship Community flood resilience assessment of Saadi neighborhood, Shiraz, Iran Risk communication and Covid-19 through the lens of anonymous sources
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1