Decades of research identify risk perception as a largely intuitive and affective construct, in contrast to the more deliberative assessments of probability and consequences that form the foundation of risk assessment. However, a review of the literature reveals that many of the risk perception measures employed in survey research with human subjects are either generic in nature, not capturing any particular affective, probabilistic, or consequential dimension of risk; or focused solely on judgments of probability. The goal of this research was to assess a multidimensional measure of risk perception across multiple hazards to identify a measure that will be broadly useful for assessing perceived risk moving forward. Our results support the idea of risk perception being multidimensional, but largely a function of individual affective reactions to the hazard. We also find that our measure of risk perception holds across multiple types of hazards, ranging from those that are behavioral in nature (e.g., health and safety behaviors), to those that are technological (e.g., pollution), or natural (e.g., extreme weather). We suggest that a general, unidimensional measure of risk may accurately capture one's perception of the severity of the consequences, and the discrete emotions that are felt in response to those potential consequences. However, such a measure is not likely to capture the perceived probability of experiencing the outcomes, nor will it be as useful at understanding one's motivation to take mitigation action.

No abstract

Although advanced thermostat technologies offer energy efficiency potential, these devices alone do not guarantee savings. Household occupants often deviate from thermostat programs, perhaps due to differing thermal comfort preferences, which are strong drivers of residential energy use and vary across genders. This study aims to develop an initial typology of interpersonal interactions around thermal comfort, explore the role of gender in such interactions, and examine the impacts of interactions on thermostat adjustments. Using n = 1568 diary observations collected from 112 participants, we identify three interaction types: conflicts, compromises, and agreements. Fixed effects analyses find that women are marginally more likely to report engaging in conflicts, whereas men are significantly more likely to report engaging in agreements and compromises, both of which are associated with greater likelihood of adjusting thermostats within a given day. This work represents an early step in investigating the multiply determined nature of household energy decisions.

While individual perceptions of risk are central to many behavioral theories of hazard response and are of considerable interest in both conceptual and applied work surrounding risk, hazards, and decision making, there is currently no consensus on how perceived risk should best be measured. Several recent efforts have laid the groundwork for a conceptual model outlining four key factors that make up risk perception: exposure, susceptibility, severity, and affective response. In this article, we use an extensive scale‐development process to develop empirically supported 3–4 item subscales to measure each of those four dimensions. Using cognitive interviewing techniques and several quantitative psychometric methods including exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis and item‐response theory analyses, we reduce a large set of potential items to the highest‐quality items to assess each subscale. These subscales can be used to make comparisons across perceived risk in different hazard contexts and populations.

A significant amount of research has examined what motivates people living in fire-prone areas to mitigate their wildfire risk (i.e. engage in activities that reduce vulnerability and the effects of a wildfire on an individual’s property). However, drawing overarching conclusions from this research is difficult because of the myriad of ways researchers have measured and analysed wildfire risk mitigation. Although recommendations exist for measuring risk-mitigation activities, no research to date has based these recommendations on an examination of how different operationalisations influence subsequent interpretations of homeowner preparedness. We addressed this gap by examining how the effects of demographics and contextual factors on preparedness differ across different ways of counting the amount of vegetation management completed. We also examined how different statistical approaches influence the results. We found that measuring vegetation management as the sum of activities completed is problematic and can obfuscate important relationships. For example, age is positively related to the proportion of applicable activities completed, but not the total number. We recommend assessing which items are applicable to respondents and constructing proportional measures rather than sums. We also recommend that, given the need for maintenance of vegetation, researchers use non-binary measures that allow respondents to indicate how much work they have undertaken towards each activity.