Dispute and morality in the perception of societal risks: extending the psychometric model

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Standard

Dispute and morality in the perception of societal risks: extending the psychometric model. / Bassarak, Claudia; Pfister, Hans-Rüdiger; Böhm, Gisela.
In: Journal of Risk Research, Vol. 20, No. 3, 04.03.2017, p. 299-325.

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bassarak C, Pfister HR, Böhm G. Dispute and morality in the perception of societal risks: extending the psychometric model. Journal of Risk Research. 2017 Mar 4;20(3):299-325. Epub 2015 May 26. doi: 10.1080/13669877.2015.1043571

Bibtex

@article{dd0d79d2a2f843c9b9916e86228b92e5,
title = "Dispute and morality in the perception of societal risks: extending the psychometric model",
abstract = "The psychometric paradigm has identified two classic dimensions, dread and unknown risk, structuring the perception of risks. We propose that disputed risk and morality are two additional dimensions that are relevant to describe the cognitive representation of societal risks. Disputed risk captures two aspects of a societal risk: first, that consensus about scientific evidence is low, and second, that the public debate about the risk issue is highly controversial. Morality refers to judgments of reprehensibility, capturing the fact that societal risks frequently involve violations of moral principles. In a survey study employing two samples, a household sample (N = 418) and a student sample (N = 88), participants evaluated 24 societal risks on 23 psychometric scales intended to assess the four constructs dread, unknown risk, disputed risk, and morality. Principal component analyses yielded three dimensions: a common dimension of dread and morality, a disputed risk dimension, and unknown risk. We also assessed judgments of overall riskiness for all risks. Morality and dread both proved to be strong and distinctive predictors of perceived overall riskiness in regression analyses; disputed risk and unknown risk, in contrast, do not play a substantial role as predictors. These findings were replicated across both samples. We conclude that disputed risk constitutes a novel and unique psychometric dimension; morality, on the other hand, coincides with dread in the cognitive representation of societal risks, while still showing a distinct and strong effect in the prediction of risk judgments. ",
keywords = "Business psychology, risk perception, psychometric paradigm, morality, disputed risk, societal risks",
author = "Claudia Bassarak and Hans-R{\"u}diger Pfister and Gisela B{\"o}hm",
year = "2017",
month = mar,
day = "4",
doi = "10.1080/13669877.2015.1043571",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "299--325",
journal = "Journal of Risk Research",
issn = "1366-9877",
publisher = "Routledge Taylor & Francis Group",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Dispute and morality in the perception of societal risks: extending the psychometric model

AU - Bassarak, Claudia

AU - Pfister, Hans-Rüdiger

AU - Böhm, Gisela

PY - 2017/3/4

Y1 - 2017/3/4

N2 - The psychometric paradigm has identified two classic dimensions, dread and unknown risk, structuring the perception of risks. We propose that disputed risk and morality are two additional dimensions that are relevant to describe the cognitive representation of societal risks. Disputed risk captures two aspects of a societal risk: first, that consensus about scientific evidence is low, and second, that the public debate about the risk issue is highly controversial. Morality refers to judgments of reprehensibility, capturing the fact that societal risks frequently involve violations of moral principles. In a survey study employing two samples, a household sample (N = 418) and a student sample (N = 88), participants evaluated 24 societal risks on 23 psychometric scales intended to assess the four constructs dread, unknown risk, disputed risk, and morality. Principal component analyses yielded three dimensions: a common dimension of dread and morality, a disputed risk dimension, and unknown risk. We also assessed judgments of overall riskiness for all risks. Morality and dread both proved to be strong and distinctive predictors of perceived overall riskiness in regression analyses; disputed risk and unknown risk, in contrast, do not play a substantial role as predictors. These findings were replicated across both samples. We conclude that disputed risk constitutes a novel and unique psychometric dimension; morality, on the other hand, coincides with dread in the cognitive representation of societal risks, while still showing a distinct and strong effect in the prediction of risk judgments.

AB - The psychometric paradigm has identified two classic dimensions, dread and unknown risk, structuring the perception of risks. We propose that disputed risk and morality are two additional dimensions that are relevant to describe the cognitive representation of societal risks. Disputed risk captures two aspects of a societal risk: first, that consensus about scientific evidence is low, and second, that the public debate about the risk issue is highly controversial. Morality refers to judgments of reprehensibility, capturing the fact that societal risks frequently involve violations of moral principles. In a survey study employing two samples, a household sample (N = 418) and a student sample (N = 88), participants evaluated 24 societal risks on 23 psychometric scales intended to assess the four constructs dread, unknown risk, disputed risk, and morality. Principal component analyses yielded three dimensions: a common dimension of dread and morality, a disputed risk dimension, and unknown risk. We also assessed judgments of overall riskiness for all risks. Morality and dread both proved to be strong and distinctive predictors of perceived overall riskiness in regression analyses; disputed risk and unknown risk, in contrast, do not play a substantial role as predictors. These findings were replicated across both samples. We conclude that disputed risk constitutes a novel and unique psychometric dimension; morality, on the other hand, coincides with dread in the cognitive representation of societal risks, while still showing a distinct and strong effect in the prediction of risk judgments.

KW - Business psychology

KW - risk perception

KW - psychometric paradigm

KW - morality

KW - disputed risk

KW - societal risks

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84930079220&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/13669877.2015.1043571

DO - 10.1080/13669877.2015.1043571

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 20

SP - 299

EP - 325

JO - Journal of Risk Research

JF - Journal of Risk Research

SN - 1366-9877

IS - 3

ER -

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. art thinking doing art: Artistic Practices in Educational Contexts from 1900 to Today
  2. Workforce age trends and projections
  3. Eine strukturelle Version der Theorie der Statusinkonsistenz
  4. Preservice teachers’ competency development and opportunities to learn in teaching multilingual learners in Germany
  5. How to determine the pion cloud of the constituent quark
  6. Inexistent Ink
  7. Assessing pre-travel online destination experience values of destination websites
  8. Regulation of morally responsible agents with motivation crowding
  9. Knowledge acquisition and development in sustainability-oriented small and medium-sized enterprises
  10. Destinationsmanagement 3.0 – Auf dem Weg zu einem neuen Aufgabenverständnis
  11. Building collective institutional infrastructures for decent platform work: The development of a crowdwork agreement in Germany
  12. There is no software, there are just services
  13. Cross-Border Knowledge Transfer in the Digital Age
  14. Recurrence-based diagnostics of rotary systems
  15. Edward Lear, A book of nonsense
  16. Quality and Adoption of COVID-19 Tracing Apps and Recommendations for Development
  17. Nostalgia is not what it used to be
  18. Special Issue: A variational pragmatic approach to regional variation in language: Celebrating the work of Klaus P. Schneider
  19. A trait-based framework linking the soil metabolome to plant–soil feedbacks
  20. „Wie gehe ich mit Widersprüchlichkeiten um?“
  21. Pushing the Boundaries
  22. How selfish are self-expression values?
  23. Burdens, Stresses, Resources and Needs of School Management and Teaching staff during the Corona Pandemic. Results of a qualitative Interview Study at primary and secondary Schools in Hesse
  24. Towards greener and sustainable ionic liquids using naturally occurring and nature-inspired pyridinium structures
  25. Material utilization of organic residues
  26. Future-Making
  27. Introduction