Problems of Risk Communication Related to the Provision of the Radiation Safety. Basic Concepts and Definitions

Репин, Л. В.; Библин, А. М.; Вишнякова, Н. М.

doi:10.21514/1998-426x-2018-11-3-83-91

“…jects and process it trying to attract their audience with striking headings [1]. People more often appeal to the emotional component in risks, fears and anxieties; they do not understand expert language [2,3] and, as a rule, do not trust decision-makers and mass media [4]. This induces growing social tensions and leads to further mismatch between opinions and managerial decisions [5].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The data were collected by performing formalized questionings among people living in industrial cities. Overall, three questioning were performed over several years (2014 2 , 2016 3 and 2020 4 ). Each questioning suggested the respondents answer seven questions: "How __________________________ do you estimate a probability of an event in %, if this event is …".…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The formalized questioning of Perm region population aged 18 years and older "Risk communications within the environmental risks sphere" (the grant provided by the RHSF No. 14-16-59011) was performed by the experts from Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies in 2014, a phone survey, quota sampling (n = 1041) 3. The formalized questioning of workers employed at PJSC Uralkalii (town of Berezniki) was performed by the experts from Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies in 2016, handout questionnaires filled in at workplaces, target sampling (n = 119) 4.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Methodical approaches to assessing subjective health risk perception by population under exposure to ambient air pollution

Barg¹,

Lebedeva-Nesevrya²,

Kornilitsyna³

2022

Health Risk Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a growing demand by the civil society for relevant information on the environment quality and related health risks. The state should be able to satisfy this demand and this makes the present research truly vital. It concentrates on correlating expert and non-expert opinions expressed when perceiving risk quantification. Our goal was to answer two following questions: 1) How does an average unprofessional person quantify a probability and severity when he or she hears certain verbal expressions that denominate them? 2) How can we possibly identify the assessment of health risks associated with environmental pollution factors given by the population in general or specific social groups? To find answers to these questions, we applied quantitative methods for data collection and analysis. The first stage involved collecting data on subjective correlation of a verbal probability scale with its numeric expression among people living in industrial cities. The second stage focused on testing the methodology for studying assessments of health risks associated with ambient air pollution given by the population/social groups. This methodology relied on the results obtained at the previous stage. We established that only 70 % of people actually correlated words with figures. We determined that experts tended to rate probabilities approximately by 10 % higher than “average people” did when it came down to such words as “Virtually certain” and “Very likely”. Such words as “Likely”, “Similarly likely” and “Unlikely” were also rated differently but with a smaller gap between the opinions. The study also provides a method for determining the public assessment of health associated with ambient air pollution. The research results give an opportunity to solve a practical task related to informing the population about health risks and to overcome a so-called language barrier between experts and ordinary people. For example, messages aimed for decision-makers can be adapted considering all the identified perception peculiarities.

show abstract

“…СМИ выступают ретрансляторами информации, поступающей от других субъектов, и перерабатывают ее, пытаясь привлечь аудиторию яркими заголовками [1]. Население чаще апеллирует к эмоциональной составляющей восприятия рисковстрахам и тревогам, не понимает языка экспертов [2,3] и, как правило, не доверяет лицам, принимающим решения, и СМИ [4], что провоцирует рост социального напряжения и дальнейшую несогласованность мнений и управленческих решений [5]. В докладе ВОЗ по проблемам здоровья и окружающей среды отмечено: «Люди плохо понимают критерий вероятности.…”

unclassified

“…2 Формализованный опрос населения Пермского края в возрасте 18 лет и старше «Риск-коммуникации в сфере экологических рисков» (грант РГНФ № 14-16-59011), проведенный специалистами ФБУН «ФНЦ медико-профилактических технологий управления рисками здоровью населения» в 2014 г. методом телефонного опроса, квотная выборка (n = 1041). 3 Формализованный опрос работников ПАО «Уралкалий» (г. Березники), проведенный специалистами ФБУН «ФНЦ медико-профилактических технологий управления рисками здоровью населения» в 2016 г. методом раздаточного анкетирования на рабочем месте, целевая выборка (n = 119). 4 Формализованный опрос населения крупных промышленных городов России, проведенный специалистами ФБУН «ФНЦ медико-профилактических технологий управления рисками здоровью населения» в 2020 г. методом раздаточного и online-анкетирования, стихийная выборка (n = 163).…”

unclassified

Methodical approaches to assessing subjective health risk perception by population under exposure to ambient air pollution

Barg¹,

Lebedeva-Nesevrya²,

Kornilitsyna³

2022

Health Risk Analysis

1

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a growing demand by the civil society for relevant information on the environment quality and related health risks. The state should be able to satisfy this demand and this makes the present research truly vital. It concentrates on correlating expert and non-expert opinions expressed when perceiving risk quantification. Our goal was to answer two following questions: 1) How does an average unprofessional person quantify a probability and severity when he or she hears certain verbal expressions that denominate them? 2) How can we possibly identify the assessment of health risks associated with environmental pollution factors given by the population in general or specific social groups? To find answers to these questions, we applied quantitative methods for data collection and analysis. The first stage involved collecting data on subjective correlation of a verbal probability scale with its numeric expression among people living in industrial cities. The second stage focused on testing the methodology for studying assessments of health risks associated with ambient air pollution given by the population/social groups. This methodology relied on the results obtained at the previous stage. We established that only 70 % of people actually correlated words with figures. We determined that experts tended to rate probabilities approximately by 10 % higher than “average people” did when it came down to such words as “Virtually certain” and “Very likely”. Such words as “Likely”, “Similarly likely” and “Unlikely” were also rated differently but with a smaller gap between the opinions. The study also provides a method for determining the public assessment of health associated with ambient air pollution. The research results give an opportunity to solve a practical task related to informing the population about health risks and to overcome a so-called language barrier between experts and ordinary people. For example, messages aimed for decision-makers can be adapted considering all the identified perception peculiarities.

show abstract

Problems of risk communication: methodological approaches to the use of sociological data in planning of information work with the population on radiation safety issues

Репин

¹

,

Библин

²

,

Вишнякова

³

et al. 2019

Radiac. gig. (2008)

Self Cite

4

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Publications of the IAEA, ICRP, the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of October 13, 2018 No. 585 “On the Approval of the Basic Principles of State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Field of Nuclear and Radiation Safety until 2025 and beyond” emphasize the increasing role of public in decision-making in the use of ionizing radiation. Sociological research is a part of the preparatory stage in the organization of interaction with stakeholders. During that stage, the participants in the information interaction (stakeholders) have an opportunity to study each other’s attitudes, so that the interaction is as constructive as possible. Sociological studies allow to determine the positions of stakeholders on the subject of risk communication at the initial stage of the process, in the implementation of decisions and in assessing the effectiveness of risk communication. The basis of the sociological study is the program. In forming a sociological research program, it is necessary to pre-identify important factors that can influence the attitude to a particular management decision of different stakeholders. The main purpose of the sociological research is to study the range of opinions and features of perception of the planned management decision by various participants in the process of risk communication. In assessing sociological research, one of the main tasks is to determine the nature of possible contradictions in the positions of the stakeholders, which largely determines the willingness of the interested parties to dialogue. In the consensus risk communication, the results of sociological research are useful in the formation of three sections of information materials: general information about the event, benefit assessment, and threat assessment.

show abstract

Problems of Risk Communication Related to the Provision of the Radiation Safety. Basic Concepts and Definitions

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

Methodical approaches to assessing subjective health risk perception by population under exposure to ambient air pollution

Methodical approaches to assessing subjective health risk perception by population under exposure to ambient air pollution

Methodical approaches to assessing subjective health risk perception by population under exposure to ambient air pollution

Problems of risk communication: methodological approaches to the use of sociological data in planning of information work with the population on radiation safety issues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About