Abstract:Air pollution is a serious environmental issue that has been long recognized. Whereas government policies attempt to reduce air pollution by controlling various pollution sources, research on risk perception of air pollution tends to treat air pollution as a single unified risk and neglects the complication of the polluting sources. Previous research consistently demonstrates that lay people have an inaccurate understanding of air pollution and are unwilling to change their behaviors to decrease pollution. How… Show more
“…Studies where the measures focused on a particular characteristic of the risk itself or what type of risk a hazard presented (e.g., a controllable risk, a desired risk), were excluded. For example, we excluded a study measuring the controllability of recreation‐based risk because it was narrowly focused on particular characteristics of a risk but not perception per se (Rickard, ), but included studies where controllability items were included as explicit measures of risk perception (Ho, Shaw, Lin, & Chiu, ; Mann & Wolfe, ; Niens, Strack, & Marggraf, ; Zhou, Song, & Tian, ). The collection of studies continued until there was a high amount of repetition in the items used to operationalize risk perception.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three of these studies measured discrete emotions (the extent to which, for example, a respondent felt fearful, anxious, worried, etc.) in addition to holistic concern (Demuth, Morss, Lazo, & Trumbo, ; Mann & Wolfe, ; Trumbo et al., ) and two contained items measuring the psychometric paradigm dimensions (i.e., the extent to which a risk is dreaded, controllable, unknown) (Niens et al., ; Zhou et al., ). Five studies (6%) combined probability only measures with affect (e.g., Armas, Ionescu, & Posner, ; Ram & Chand, ; Rübsamen et al., ).…”
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.
“…Studies where the measures focused on a particular characteristic of the risk itself or what type of risk a hazard presented (e.g., a controllable risk, a desired risk), were excluded. For example, we excluded a study measuring the controllability of recreation‐based risk because it was narrowly focused on particular characteristics of a risk but not perception per se (Rickard, ), but included studies where controllability items were included as explicit measures of risk perception (Ho, Shaw, Lin, & Chiu, ; Mann & Wolfe, ; Niens, Strack, & Marggraf, ; Zhou, Song, & Tian, ). The collection of studies continued until there was a high amount of repetition in the items used to operationalize risk perception.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three of these studies measured discrete emotions (the extent to which, for example, a respondent felt fearful, anxious, worried, etc.) in addition to holistic concern (Demuth, Morss, Lazo, & Trumbo, ; Mann & Wolfe, ; Trumbo et al., ) and two contained items measuring the psychometric paradigm dimensions (i.e., the extent to which a risk is dreaded, controllable, unknown) (Niens et al., ; Zhou et al., ). Five studies (6%) combined probability only measures with affect (e.g., Armas, Ionescu, & Posner, ; Ram & Chand, ; Rübsamen et al., ).…”
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.
“…When facing diverse health risks, the more menaces are perceived by hospital workers, the more actions are taken to alleviate these risks 54 . In addition, information has a direct influence on individuals’ perception, the information about climate change also can shape individuals’ health risk perception and contribute to the adoption of PEB 55 , 56 . Every hospital makes huge contributions to environmental issues in the progress of diagnosis, treatment, and management diseases 9 .…”
Section: Theoretical Background and Hypothesesmentioning
Climate change is a serious environmental issue appearing in China. As a public service institution operating around the clock, the negative impact of hospitals on the environment is evident, promoting their workers’ pro-environmental behavior (PEB) through increasing climate change health risk perception (CHRP) is an effective method to protect the environment and achieve sustainable development. This study investigates how CHRP shapes pro-environmental attitude (PEA), pro-environmental intention (PEI), and pro-environmental behavior (PEB) among hospital workers. Using structural equation modeling (SEM) to determine the chain of causation from CHRP to PEB among hospital workers. The result shows that CHRP positively affects PEA and PEI, and PEI positively affects their PEB. In addition, although CHRP has no significant direct effect on PEB, it can play a crucial indirect effect through the mediating role of PEI. Moreover, the result of multiple regression shows that there are significant differences regarding PEA, PEI, and PEB.
“…The time lag from the year of survey until the publication ranged from 0 to 14 years, with a median duration of 3 years ( Table 1 ). However, 10 studies did not clearly report the year of the survey in the manuscript [ 48 , 61 , 70–77 ]. Figure 2.…”
Section: Overview Of the Included Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sixty-one studies targeted the residents of the study areas [ 24 , 27 , 28 , 30–34 , 37 , 38 , 41 , 43–45 , 48–50 , 52 , 53 , 56–60 , 62 , 63 , 65 , 69–73 , 76 , 78–105 ] and 11 studies recruited participants using nationwide sampling or online panels [ 21 , 35 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 66–68 , 106–108 ]. Several studies targeted school-related subjects [ 18 , 26 , 36 , 47 , 61 , 109 , 110 ] and specific occupations workers [ 29 , 46 , 64 , 74 , 111 ].…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
