Pub Date : 2022-09-05DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2022.2108119
Michelle S. F. Arcúrio, Fabiana S. de Arruda
Abstract Screening process at airports is considered as a critical element for airport security. The screening checkpoints are a component of the airport infrastructure that constitutes a contribution to the security of nations. Regarding the human factor in screening checkpoints, there is an opportunity to consider their specificities within the scope of risk management. This study aimed to develop a consistent tool (risk matrix) which serves as a guide for airports to assess and map human factors in the screening checkpoints. The research method involved four phases, namely: Phase 1: Criterion-conceptual design of the Risk Matrix Modeling; Phase 2: Instrument Construction; Phase 3: Instrument validation; and Phase 4: Practical application of the instrument in a real airport operational context. The risk matrix structure comprises four methodological steps (context, risks, assessment and response) and presents criteria that were not used for this purpose, such as residual risks analysis and financial impact dosimetry linked to administrative measures arising from quality control actions. The tool consists of eleven correlated spreadsheets and is a useful model for mapping human factors (HF-AVSEC) under the security scope. The main results from this study are: (i) the elaboration of a conceptual model for the human factors risk matrix in AVSEC; (ii) the establishment of criteria for the human factors risk matrix; (iii) the development of a practical instrument modeling for AVSEC human factor management (HFM-AVSEC); (iv) validation of the risk matrix criteria by an expert panel working in Class AP-3 and Class AP-2 airports; (v) the application of the matrix in two Brazilian airports (Class AP-2 and Class AP-3), constituting a pioneering, practical and effective contribution to the AVSEC in terms of risk management at airports. The proposed matrix can be replicated by organizations in the aviation industry and by other entities structured as complex and socio-technical systems.
{"title":"Risk management of human factors in airports screening process","authors":"Michelle S. F. Arcúrio, Fabiana S. de Arruda","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2022.2108119","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2022.2108119","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Screening process at airports is considered as a critical element for airport security. The screening checkpoints are a component of the airport infrastructure that constitutes a contribution to the security of nations. Regarding the human factor in screening checkpoints, there is an opportunity to consider their specificities within the scope of risk management. This study aimed to develop a consistent tool (risk matrix) which serves as a guide for airports to assess and map human factors in the screening checkpoints. The research method involved four phases, namely: Phase 1: Criterion-conceptual design of the Risk Matrix Modeling; Phase 2: Instrument Construction; Phase 3: Instrument validation; and Phase 4: Practical application of the instrument in a real airport operational context. The risk matrix structure comprises four methodological steps (context, risks, assessment and response) and presents criteria that were not used for this purpose, such as residual risks analysis and financial impact dosimetry linked to administrative measures arising from quality control actions. The tool consists of eleven correlated spreadsheets and is a useful model for mapping human factors (HF-AVSEC) under the security scope. The main results from this study are: (i) the elaboration of a conceptual model for the human factors risk matrix in AVSEC; (ii) the establishment of criteria for the human factors risk matrix; (iii) the development of a practical instrument modeling for AVSEC human factor management (HFM-AVSEC); (iv) validation of the risk matrix criteria by an expert panel working in Class AP-3 and Class AP-2 airports; (v) the application of the matrix in two Brazilian airports (Class AP-2 and Class AP-3), constituting a pioneering, practical and effective contribution to the AVSEC in terms of risk management at airports. The proposed matrix can be replicated by organizations in the aviation industry and by other entities structured as complex and socio-technical systems.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"26 1","pages":"147 - 162"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44216509","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-05DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2022.2116086
Cassandra L. C. Troy, Juliet Pinto, Zheng Cui
Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic drastically altered the lives of global populations. As many struggled to adapt to the challenges of a pandemic, 2020 brought the most active Atlantic hurricane season on record. Government officials and other emergency management sources were faced with the challenge of crafting communications that took into account these dual crises and the challenges people navigated when making storm preparation decisions in light of health risks posed by COVID-19. Past research has shown that social media act as valuable sources of information during emergencies and natural disasters, therefore a mixed methods approach was used to analyze tweets about preparation for Hurricane Laura, which struck America’s Gulf Coast during August 2020. The Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication Model (CERC) was used to examine how the simultaneous occurrence of threats in the pre-crisis and maintenance stages impacted the public’s concerns as well as how official messaging matched with or diverged from audience needs. Findings indicate the continuing utility of CERC, while at the same time suggesting needed revisions for when dual crises strike, situations that are likely to continue in an age of accelerating climate change. We couch conclusions with implications for scholars, practitioners and public officials.
{"title":"Managing complexity during dual crises: social media messaging of hurricane preparedness during COVID-19","authors":"Cassandra L. C. Troy, Juliet Pinto, Zheng Cui","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2022.2116086","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2022.2116086","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic drastically altered the lives of global populations. As many struggled to adapt to the challenges of a pandemic, 2020 brought the most active Atlantic hurricane season on record. Government officials and other emergency management sources were faced with the challenge of crafting communications that took into account these dual crises and the challenges people navigated when making storm preparation decisions in light of health risks posed by COVID-19. Past research has shown that social media act as valuable sources of information during emergencies and natural disasters, therefore a mixed methods approach was used to analyze tweets about preparation for Hurricane Laura, which struck America’s Gulf Coast during August 2020. The Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication Model (CERC) was used to examine how the simultaneous occurrence of threats in the pre-crisis and maintenance stages impacted the public’s concerns as well as how official messaging matched with or diverged from audience needs. Findings indicate the continuing utility of CERC, while at the same time suggesting needed revisions for when dual crises strike, situations that are likely to continue in an age of accelerating climate change. We couch conclusions with implications for scholars, practitioners and public officials.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"1458 - 1475"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43283795","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2022.2116084
Prerna Shah, J. Yang, L. Kahlor
Abstract Climate change poses innumerable threats to economic, social, and environmental systems. Despite our best efforts, emerging research indicates that mitigation and adaptation efforts must incorporate technologies such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) to draw carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it elsewhere. This study examines how psychological distance and perceived risk pertaining to climate change influence Texans’ support for CCS through perceived CCS costs/benefits and affect. Overall, the results indicate that perceived psychological distance of climate change influences support for CCS through risk perception about local climate change impacts, perceived CCS benefits, and affective evaluation. Political partisanship moderates the relationship between psychological distance and climate change risk perception, but not the relationship between psychological distance and support for CCS.
{"title":"Psychological distance, risk perception, and affect: Texas residents’ support for carbon capture and storage","authors":"Prerna Shah, J. Yang, L. Kahlor","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2022.2116084","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2022.2116084","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Climate change poses innumerable threats to economic, social, and environmental systems. Despite our best efforts, emerging research indicates that mitigation and adaptation efforts must incorporate technologies such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) to draw carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it elsewhere. This study examines how psychological distance and perceived risk pertaining to climate change influence Texans’ support for CCS through perceived CCS costs/benefits and affect. Overall, the results indicate that perceived psychological distance of climate change influences support for CCS through risk perception about local climate change impacts, perceived CCS benefits, and affective evaluation. Political partisanship moderates the relationship between psychological distance and climate change risk perception, but not the relationship between psychological distance and support for CCS.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"26 1","pages":"184 - 198"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47037897","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-01DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2022.2116083
Nikolas Koch, B. Durodié
Abstract COVID-19 has been a transformational crisis, uprooting everyday lives and causing some of the most significant health, social, and economic challenges in recent memory. Similarly, coronavirus has also forced significant political change, refocusing attention on politics and policymaking structures during a time of crisis. This shift is exemplified by scientific advisers’ role at the forefront of governmental decision-making. Scientific advice has provided vital knowledge and insight into the government’s pandemic responses. However, the coronavirus pandemic has also highlighted the complex nature of combining science with politics, as well as the difficulties involved in distinguishing between expert advice and political or moral choices. Such complexity warrants a reconsideration of science’s impact on policymaking. Namely, from a long-term view, the growth of governmental experts started well before the coronavirus pandemic. Partly, this proliferation is driven by a desire to improve policymaking, given that there is a clear need to effectively consult, consider, and act on the advice of experts in all fields of government. Nevertheless, societal changes like a declining trust in government also mean that expert advice can increasingly be used as a tool to legitimate or depoliticise debates. Considering the complexity of fighting a global pandemic, this belies that advice must be effectively scrutinised within broader contextual or operational considerations – a government cannot simply ‘follow the science’. Coronavirus highlights the need for a renewed focus on the interplay of expertise and policymaking, considering who, why, and on what basis governments are advised – as well as what lessons they draw from it.
{"title":"Scientists advise, ministers decide? The role of scientific expertise in UK policymaking during the coronavirus pandemic","authors":"Nikolas Koch, B. Durodié","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2022.2116083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2022.2116083","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract COVID-19 has been a transformational crisis, uprooting everyday lives and causing some of the most significant health, social, and economic challenges in recent memory. Similarly, coronavirus has also forced significant political change, refocusing attention on politics and policymaking structures during a time of crisis. This shift is exemplified by scientific advisers’ role at the forefront of governmental decision-making. Scientific advice has provided vital knowledge and insight into the government’s pandemic responses. However, the coronavirus pandemic has also highlighted the complex nature of combining science with politics, as well as the difficulties involved in distinguishing between expert advice and political or moral choices. Such complexity warrants a reconsideration of science’s impact on policymaking. Namely, from a long-term view, the growth of governmental experts started well before the coronavirus pandemic. Partly, this proliferation is driven by a desire to improve policymaking, given that there is a clear need to effectively consult, consider, and act on the advice of experts in all fields of government. Nevertheless, societal changes like a declining trust in government also mean that expert advice can increasingly be used as a tool to legitimate or depoliticise debates. Considering the complexity of fighting a global pandemic, this belies that advice must be effectively scrutinised within broader contextual or operational considerations – a government cannot simply ‘follow the science’. Coronavirus highlights the need for a renewed focus on the interplay of expertise and policymaking, considering who, why, and on what basis governments are advised – as well as what lessons they draw from it.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"1213 - 1222"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46792721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-12DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2022.2108116
T. Reader, A. Gillespie
Abstract Measuring organisational culture is important for detecting the values and practices that increase organisational risk (e.g., unethical conduct). Self-report methods (e.g., surveys) are mostly used to study culture: however, due to reporting biases and sampling limitations, and the rapid advance of digital data, researchers have proposed unobtrusive indicators of culture (UICs; e.g., drawn from social media, company reports, executive data) as a supplementary methodology for identifying organisations at risk of failure. A UIC is a single measure of organisational culture drawn from data collected without engaging employees, and research using UICs is in its nascent stage. Although various data sources have been established for studying culture unobtrusively, researchers have yet to explore the application of multiple UICs drawn from different data sources. To investigate this, we developed an experimental battery of 83 UICs drawn from seven data sources (e.g., company earnings calls, employee online reviews, executive data), applying diverse analyses (e.g., natural language processing, quantitative analysis of behavioural data) to measure eight dimensions of culture (e.g., governance, integrity). We then applied the battery to assess 312 large European companies. We found that the UICs could distinguish between companies and different industries, and one dimension (customer focus) was associated with an outcome variable commonly used in culture research (Return on Capital Employed). However, we were not able to establish a coherent set of statistically reliable dimensions due to the clustering of UICs by data source. This clustering likely occurred because data sources reflected the values and practices of different stakeholders (e.g., employees, managers), which underscores a conceptualisation of culture that is focused less on shared values across an institution, and more on the values, priorities, and practices experienced by different sub-groups. Future research could structure UICs according to data sources and apply UICs to examine the causes of organisational failure.
{"title":"Developing a battery of measures for unobtrusive indicators of organisational culture: a research note","authors":"T. Reader, A. Gillespie","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2022.2108116","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2022.2108116","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Measuring organisational culture is important for detecting the values and practices that increase organisational risk (e.g., unethical conduct). Self-report methods (e.g., surveys) are mostly used to study culture: however, due to reporting biases and sampling limitations, and the rapid advance of digital data, researchers have proposed unobtrusive indicators of culture (UICs; e.g., drawn from social media, company reports, executive data) as a supplementary methodology for identifying organisations at risk of failure. A UIC is a single measure of organisational culture drawn from data collected without engaging employees, and research using UICs is in its nascent stage. Although various data sources have been established for studying culture unobtrusively, researchers have yet to explore the application of multiple UICs drawn from different data sources. To investigate this, we developed an experimental battery of 83 UICs drawn from seven data sources (e.g., company earnings calls, employee online reviews, executive data), applying diverse analyses (e.g., natural language processing, quantitative analysis of behavioural data) to measure eight dimensions of culture (e.g., governance, integrity). We then applied the battery to assess 312 large European companies. We found that the UICs could distinguish between companies and different industries, and one dimension (customer focus) was associated with an outcome variable commonly used in culture research (Return on Capital Employed). However, we were not able to establish a coherent set of statistically reliable dimensions due to the clustering of UICs by data source. This clustering likely occurred because data sources reflected the values and practices of different stakeholders (e.g., employees, managers), which underscores a conceptualisation of culture that is focused less on shared values across an institution, and more on the values, priorities, and practices experienced by different sub-groups. Future research could structure UICs according to data sources and apply UICs to examine the causes of organisational failure.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"26 1","pages":"1 - 18"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45929440","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-10DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2022.2108118
Ronald B. Larson
Abstract Consumers face the risk that their food is unsafe because of natural and accidental contamination (traditional food safety problems) or deliberate contamination (food defense problems). Coordinated international efforts with leadership from developed countries could help reduce these food risks. If consumers within or between countries have different attitudes about the risks, it may be difficult to generate sufficient political support for building an international food safety system. A unique consumer survey of adults in the US, the UK, Spain, Italy, Germany, and Japan identified consumer attitudes about traditional food safety and food defense. Concerns about traditional food safety, confidence in the system to prevent intentional contamination, and funding allocations between food safety and food defense were examined in models with two sets of cultural control measures. Many people perceived food safety to be different from food defense. Food safety concerns were linked to gender, age, presence of children, education, income, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity. Food defense confidence was associated with gender, age, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance. Funding allocations were examined in two models and power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and individualism were significant. Although it was expected that low concerns about food safety and low confidence in food defense would increase the allocation share for food defense, this was not confirmed in the data. Many differences were noted between countries, showing the importance of culture for understanding attitudes toward food risks. Although both sets of cultural measures made significant contributions, neither was judged to be superior to country dummy variables. Given the variations found in attitudes toward food safety and food defense, creating an international solution to reduce food risks will be difficult.
{"title":"Food safety concerns and food defense support: a cross-cultural study","authors":"Ronald B. Larson","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2022.2108118","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2022.2108118","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Consumers face the risk that their food is unsafe because of natural and accidental contamination (traditional food safety problems) or deliberate contamination (food defense problems). Coordinated international efforts with leadership from developed countries could help reduce these food risks. If consumers within or between countries have different attitudes about the risks, it may be difficult to generate sufficient political support for building an international food safety system. A unique consumer survey of adults in the US, the UK, Spain, Italy, Germany, and Japan identified consumer attitudes about traditional food safety and food defense. Concerns about traditional food safety, confidence in the system to prevent intentional contamination, and funding allocations between food safety and food defense were examined in models with two sets of cultural control measures. Many people perceived food safety to be different from food defense. Food safety concerns were linked to gender, age, presence of children, education, income, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity. Food defense confidence was associated with gender, age, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance. Funding allocations were examined in two models and power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and individualism were significant. Although it was expected that low concerns about food safety and low confidence in food defense would increase the allocation share for food defense, this was not confirmed in the data. Many differences were noted between countries, showing the importance of culture for understanding attitudes toward food risks. Although both sets of cultural measures made significant contributions, neither was judged to be superior to country dummy variables. Given the variations found in attitudes toward food safety and food defense, creating an international solution to reduce food risks will be difficult.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"26 1","pages":"113 - 132"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46360737","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-10DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2022.2108120
Lucia Bellora-Bienengräber, Clemens Harten, M. Meyer
Abstract This paper investigates drivers of the effectiveness of risk assessments in risk workshops dominated by ‘quantitative skepticism’. Moreover, it contrasts our findings with those of previous research that assumed the dominance of ‘quantitative enthusiasm’. Quantitative skepticism is a calculative culture characterized by an attitude that regards risk assessments as learning tools supporting the holistic formation of judgments incorporating difficult-to-quantify information. It contrasts with quantitative enthusiasm, which is a calculative culture that considers risk assessments as fully descriptive of reality. Prior research primarily focused on understanding the effectiveness of risk assessments under a calculative culture of quantitative enthusiasm. To understand what drives the correctness of risk assessment and the time needed to assess risks in workshops under a calculative culture of quantitative skepticism, we use an agent-based model that simulates risk assessment with risk workshops and that models agents’ cognitive processes using ECHO, a constraint satisfaction network (CSN). Our simulations show that, compared to risk workshops under conditions of quantitative enthusiasm, there are often lengthy periods of stagnation in individual and collective risk assessments and a strong path dependency on discussions. Prioritizing concerned participants improves the correct assessment of high risks at the expense of the correct assessment of low risks. Notwithstanding similarities in the drivers of the effectiveness of risk assessment across different calculative cultures, our results show that the predominant calculative culture matters when—to enhance their effectiveness—designing and implementing risk workshops.
{"title":"The effectiveness of risk assessments in risk workshops: the role of calculative cultures","authors":"Lucia Bellora-Bienengräber, Clemens Harten, M. Meyer","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2022.2108120","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2022.2108120","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper investigates drivers of the effectiveness of risk assessments in risk workshops dominated by ‘quantitative skepticism’. Moreover, it contrasts our findings with those of previous research that assumed the dominance of ‘quantitative enthusiasm’. Quantitative skepticism is a calculative culture characterized by an attitude that regards risk assessments as learning tools supporting the holistic formation of judgments incorporating difficult-to-quantify information. It contrasts with quantitative enthusiasm, which is a calculative culture that considers risk assessments as fully descriptive of reality. Prior research primarily focused on understanding the effectiveness of risk assessments under a calculative culture of quantitative enthusiasm. To understand what drives the correctness of risk assessment and the time needed to assess risks in workshops under a calculative culture of quantitative skepticism, we use an agent-based model that simulates risk assessment with risk workshops and that models agents’ cognitive processes using ECHO, a constraint satisfaction network (CSN). Our simulations show that, compared to risk workshops under conditions of quantitative enthusiasm, there are often lengthy periods of stagnation in individual and collective risk assessments and a strong path dependency on discussions. Prioritizing concerned participants improves the correct assessment of high risks at the expense of the correct assessment of low risks. Notwithstanding similarities in the drivers of the effectiveness of risk assessment across different calculative cultures, our results show that the predominant calculative culture matters when—to enhance their effectiveness—designing and implementing risk workshops.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"26 1","pages":"163 - 183"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42383997","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-10DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2022.2108121
C. Cannon, R. Ferreira, Fred Buttell, Tiffany Jarquin
Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic continues to increase social, economic, and psychological risks, including increased perceived stress – or the degree to which a person perceives a stressor and their ability to cope with it. The current study uses novel data collected during the COVID-19 pandemic to assess the role of a range of demographic and disaster-related experiential variables on perceived stress (n = 744). Hierarchical linear regression indicates that women experience greater perceived stress than men and as age and educational attainment increase, perceived stress decreases. Respondents experiencing rent/mortgage stress, job loss due to the COVID-19 pandemic, anticipated reliance on others, and worry about ongoing impacts of COVID-19 on their physical health, the economy, and personal relationships also experience increased perceived stress. Results provide empirical evidence of risks stemming from the multiple concerns (i.e., financial, psychological, and physical health) of U.S. residents regarding the COVID-19 disaster. Findings indicate the need for policy and legislative actions, such as the U.S.-wide eviction moratorium, to support individuals suffering from multiple impacts from the pandemic and to reduce perceived stress and its attendant risks including increased incidents of posttraumatic stress and depression.
{"title":"Assessing explanatory variables of perceived stress to disaster: implications for risk research","authors":"C. Cannon, R. Ferreira, Fred Buttell, Tiffany Jarquin","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2022.2108121","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2022.2108121","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic continues to increase social, economic, and psychological risks, including increased perceived stress – or the degree to which a person perceives a stressor and their ability to cope with it. The current study uses novel data collected during the COVID-19 pandemic to assess the role of a range of demographic and disaster-related experiential variables on perceived stress (n = 744). Hierarchical linear regression indicates that women experience greater perceived stress than men and as age and educational attainment increase, perceived stress decreases. Respondents experiencing rent/mortgage stress, job loss due to the COVID-19 pandemic, anticipated reliance on others, and worry about ongoing impacts of COVID-19 on their physical health, the economy, and personal relationships also experience increased perceived stress. Results provide empirical evidence of risks stemming from the multiple concerns (i.e., financial, psychological, and physical health) of U.S. residents regarding the COVID-19 disaster. Findings indicate the need for policy and legislative actions, such as the U.S.-wide eviction moratorium, to support individuals suffering from multiple impacts from the pandemic and to reduce perceived stress and its attendant risks including increased incidents of posttraumatic stress and depression.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"1259 - 1271"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42680883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-10DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2022.2108122
Y. Dai, Yi-Hui Christine Huang, Wufan Jia, Qinxian Cai
Abstract Adopting the theoretical lenses of social amplification of risk framework and trust paradox, this study examines how people’s attention to media information influences their risk perception and risk management behaviors (i.e. vaccination intention) in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic in three Chinese societies (i.e. Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Mainland China). A total of 9,575 valid samples were obtained via online survey panels. The results revealed that media attention significantly influenced risk perception and risk management across the three societies. Institutional trust, however, could amplify or attenuate risk perception and risk management in different societies: While institutional trust was found to have a positive impact on people’s risk perception in Taiwan and Mainland China, a negative impact was discovered in Hong Kong. Moreover, different dimensions of institutional trust, which we term ability-based trust and benevolence-based trust, were found to mediate the effect of media attention on risk perception and risk management in different societies: While both dimensions were significant mediators for Taiwan, benevolence-based trust and ability-based trust was the only mediator for Mainland China and Hong Kong, respectively. The paradoxical impact of institutional trust on risk perception and risk management is explained with contextual factors specific to each of the three societies, supplemented with post-hoc analysis on how publics assign risk management responsibility to risk management institutions in different societies. Overall, the results provide empirical support to the social amplification of risk framework (SARF) by highlighting the roles of media and institutions as social stations that shape risk perception.
{"title":"The paradoxical effects of institutional trust on risk perception and risk management in the Covid-19 pandemic: evidence from three societies","authors":"Y. Dai, Yi-Hui Christine Huang, Wufan Jia, Qinxian Cai","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2022.2108122","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2022.2108122","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Adopting the theoretical lenses of social amplification of risk framework and trust paradox, this study examines how people’s attention to media information influences their risk perception and risk management behaviors (i.e. vaccination intention) in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic in three Chinese societies (i.e. Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Mainland China). A total of 9,575 valid samples were obtained via online survey panels. The results revealed that media attention significantly influenced risk perception and risk management across the three societies. Institutional trust, however, could amplify or attenuate risk perception and risk management in different societies: While institutional trust was found to have a positive impact on people’s risk perception in Taiwan and Mainland China, a negative impact was discovered in Hong Kong. Moreover, different dimensions of institutional trust, which we term ability-based trust and benevolence-based trust, were found to mediate the effect of media attention on risk perception and risk management in different societies: While both dimensions were significant mediators for Taiwan, benevolence-based trust and ability-based trust was the only mediator for Mainland China and Hong Kong, respectively. The paradoxical impact of institutional trust on risk perception and risk management is explained with contextual factors specific to each of the three societies, supplemented with post-hoc analysis on how publics assign risk management responsibility to risk management institutions in different societies. Overall, the results provide empirical support to the social amplification of risk framework (SARF) by highlighting the roles of media and institutions as social stations that shape risk perception.","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"1337 - 1355"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45477003","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-08DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2022.2104345
B. Taebi, M. V. van Asselt, I. van de Poel
Many technological risks transcend national borders and need to be managed in a supranational and multilateral fashion. Climate change risks and the solutions proposed for dealing with it, for instance, create risks that could only be managed multilaterally. Nuclear risks—both risk associated with nuclear accidents and nuclear materials—are also essentially multilateral. This is why there is an elaborate set of international institutions, regulations, guidelines and con-ventions in place to ensure the safety and security of millions of tons of radioactive material (both fuel and waste) and a vast number of nuclear facilities and to minimize the hazards in case of incidents. Much of what is currently in place in the global nuclear safety regime is an acknowledgement of the transboundary character of nuclear risks and they were a response to major nuclear accidents, particularly Chernobyl accident (Taebi and Mayer 2017). The need for a multilateral approach to risk governance does not only arise when conse-quences of technological risks are cross-boundary (such as in a nuclear accident) or rather globally by definition (such as climate change), but also when the (potential) risk itself is created in activities that are inherently international; think of civil aviation (Mackenzie 2010) or the use of GMO in agriculture or risks associated with AI applications. International collaborations are also indispensable for managing or reducing certain risks such as in water pollutions, risks associated with Antimicrobial Resistance. it commonly waste which
{"title":"Multilateral governance of technological risks; editors’ overview 1","authors":"B. Taebi, M. V. van Asselt, I. van de Poel","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2022.2104345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2022.2104345","url":null,"abstract":"Many technological risks transcend national borders and need to be managed in a supranational and multilateral fashion. Climate change risks and the solutions proposed for dealing with it, for instance, create risks that could only be managed multilaterally. Nuclear risks—both risk associated with nuclear accidents and nuclear materials—are also essentially multilateral. This is why there is an elaborate set of international institutions, regulations, guidelines and con-ventions in place to ensure the safety and security of millions of tons of radioactive material (both fuel and waste) and a vast number of nuclear facilities and to minimize the hazards in case of incidents. Much of what is currently in place in the global nuclear safety regime is an acknowledgement of the transboundary character of nuclear risks and they were a response to major nuclear accidents, particularly Chernobyl accident (Taebi and Mayer 2017). The need for a multilateral approach to risk governance does not only arise when conse-quences of technological risks are cross-boundary (such as in a nuclear accident) or rather globally by definition (such as climate change), but also when the (potential) risk itself is created in activities that are inherently international; think of civil aviation (Mackenzie 2010) or the use of GMO in agriculture or risks associated with AI applications. International collaborations are also indispensable for managing or reducing certain risks such as in water pollutions, risks associated with Antimicrobial Resistance. it commonly waste which","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"941 - 944"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44735617","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：