Citizen Knowledge and Choices on the Complex Issue of Nuclear Energy

Kuklinski, James H.; Metlay, Daniel; Kay, W. David

doi:10.2307/2110965

Cited by 133 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…governments' pro-nuclear positions are in line with previous scholarship that suggests that both political elites and the general public who hold right-of-centre views take a more pronuclear energy stance (Kuklinski et al 1982;Rothman and Lichter 1987;Plutzer et al 1998).…”

Section: The Dynamics Of Public Debate and Mobilisation On Nuclear Ensupporting

confidence: 83%

The effects of the Fukushima disaster on nuclear energy debates and policies: a two-step comparative examination

Bernardi

Morales

Lühiste

et al. 2017

Environmental Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Under what conditions do critical events trigger large-scale public discussion and mobilisation, and can these lead to policy change? In a comparative study of nuclear energy policy after the Japanese Fukushima disaster in March 2011, a theory-development approach is adopted, mobilising data collected from national news agencies' newswires, public surveys, legislation and parliamentary databases, and newspaper editorials in 12 established democracies between March 2011 and March 2013. The analysis suggests two main hypotheses that can guide future research: critical events are more likely to trigger policy change when intense (contentious) mobilisation from policy challengers aligns with the views of the general public, and is backed by major political allies; and critical events are more likely to trigger intense (contentious) mobilisation when policy challengers articulate their opposition around pre-existing policy debates on the issue, and resort to pre-existing organisational and mobilisation resources. Acknowledgements:The research leading to these results has received funding from the European

show abstract

Section: The Dynamics Of Public Debate and Mobilisation On Nuclear Ensupporting

confidence: 83%

The effects of the Fukushima disaster on nuclear energy debates and policies: a two-step comparative examination

Bernardi

Morales

Lühiste

et al. 2017

Environmental Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We set the five variables of the psychometric paradigm-perceived risk and benefit, knowledge, trust, and stigma-because these have been extensively investigated in risk studies on nuclear power energy. Perceived benefit [4], trust [4], and knowledge [38,39] increase acceptance of nuclear power energy, whereas perceived risk [2][3][4] and stigma [31,32] decrease it. We assumed that such structural relationships between five variables and acceptance applied to belief in rumor.…”

Section: Psychometric Paradigmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Kuklinski et al [38], more knowledge is less likely to oppose the operation and construction of nuclear power stations. Brown and White [39] indicated that the public does not understand the risk because they generally lack knowledge of nuclear power.…”

Section: Psychometric Paradigmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident on Belief in Rumors: The Role of Risk Perception and Communication

Kim

2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rumors about nuclear power energy and its risks in terms of technology are common. However, these rumors are sometimes exaggerated and not true. Our research question is what factors and variables have influence the rumors related to the Fukushima nuclear accident. We analyzed data collected through social survey (n = 1572). To measure the dependent variable, we asked respondents whether rumors related to the Fukushima nuclear accident were true or false, and the degree to which they trusted such rumors. We measured three factors in determining belief in rumors: psychometric paradigm, communication, and risk perception. We then analyzed the direct impact of these three factors on belief in rumors and the indirect moderating effect of perceived risk of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the relationship between psychometric factors and belief in rumors. Results show that in the communication factors, source credibility decreases belief in rumors whereas usefulness of information and receiver's ability increase it. All the psychometric variables have significant impacts on belief in rumors. Perceived benefit, trust, and knowledge decrease belief in rumors, and perceived risk and stigma increase it. Finally, the perceived risk of Fukushima accident plays a role of moderators between psychometric paradigm and belief in rumors.

show abstract

“…One explanation of women's environmental attitudes posits that men have more knowledge of issues related to environmental risks and that, generally, people who have such knowledge are less likely to be concerned about these types of risks [26]. A meta-analysis by Davidson and Freudenburg [27] illustrate, however, that women are more concerned about environmental hazards "not because they know less but because they care more".…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%