Chapter preview

Chapter 3 presents studies that explore the factors that predict variation in risk perception. Among the individual difference factors examined are personality, cognitive style, beliefs and experience. From the studies examined, it is concluded that risk-taking is better predicted than risk perception by personality differences. However, neuroticism-anxiety and impulsivity are related to risk perception. There is also evidence of a complex link between self-efficacy levels and locus of control orientation and perceived risk. The chapter goes on to examine the relationship between the personal exposure to, or experience of, hazards and the perceived risk associated with them. The group factors (which might also be called ‘social category’ factors) that may influence risk perception that are reviewed in the chapter include nationality, socio-demographic characteristics (like gender or race) and belonging to an expert profession. The contribution of Cultural Theory to the understanding of hazard perceptions and judgements is reviewed. Throughout, the chapter examines the methods of both data elicitation and data analysis that are used in the studies described and explains how, in a variety of ways, methods tend to determine the nature of the results that are reported.

The need for methodological rigour

When examining the conclusions drawn from studies of individual and group differences in risk perception, it is important always to evaluate the quality of the data provided. This means it is necessary to look at the samples chosen, the methods employed to collect information and the forms of analysis used. Box 3.1 summarises some of the questions that should be asked before deciding that a quantitative study is offering valuable insights. Surprisingly often, reports do not provide all of the information needed to make these evaluations. Studies using qualitative methods require other criteria to be employed but the principles are similar – who they are basing their conclusions on; what evidence they have got; and how they are making sense of that information. The National Centre for Social Research, on behalf of the Strategy Unit of the UK Government Cabinet Office, has developed a framework to guide assessments of the quality of qualitative research that is worth examining for further details on the issues relevant to evaluating qualitative data (Spencer et al., 2003).