Theories of risk perception
Experts versus lay people perception of risk
- Experts rely on quantitative information (mortality rates, statistical probabilities)
- Laypeople rely on qualitative and affective heuristics (dread, control, familiarity)
- Amplification of catastrophic, involuntary, uncontrollable, and poorly understood risks
by laypeople
- Experts view risk as expected annual mortality
- Public views risk as trust in institutions, equity, and potential damage to lifestyle and
environment
Example:
Laypeople perceive nuclear power to be high-risk due to catastrophic events like
Chernobyl (availability heuristic) while experts deem it to be statistically low risk
compared to other energy sources like coal or gas
Psychometric paradigm
- The public amplifies risk through a set of qualitative characteristics like dread,
familiarity, and voluntariness of exposure
- Risk perceptions cluster among dread risk (perceived lack of control, catastrophic
potential) and unknown risk (observability, novelty, immediacy)
- Measuring the dimensions of dread and unknown risk can predict what the public will
perceive as worthy of public concern, political debate, and demands for regulation
regardless of an event’s true probability
Example:
Experts rank driving as more risky than flying, but many people fear flying more due
to its catastrophic potential and lack of personal control (dread) as well as
unfamiliarity with plane technology (unknown)
Experiential learning in risk perception
- Based on a fast, intuitive system that prioritizes how something feels over its
statistical probability (affect heuristic)
- Personal experiences with disaster make risk perceptions more intense and
longstanding thus more resistant to expert advice and factual information
- Recent, dramatic events are easily brought to mind (availability bias) making it more
likely to overestimate the likelihood of catastrophic though statistically improbable
events
Example:
Someone who has never experienced a flood before might feel like flood insurance is
an unwarranted expense whereas their neighbour, who has experienced flooding
before, might overestimate future risk and potentially over-pay for insurance
coverage
Social representation theory in risk perception
- Risk isn’t perceived on an individual level but rather through social representations
that turn the unknown into a common, knowable reality
- Process involves fitting unfamiliar risk into preexisting categories (anchoring) and
turning the abstract into concrete examples (objectification)
- Adopting a shared viewpoint strengthens group bonds by labeling who is “us” and
who is “them”
Experts versus lay people perception of risk
- Experts rely on quantitative information (mortality rates, statistical probabilities)
- Laypeople rely on qualitative and affective heuristics (dread, control, familiarity)
- Amplification of catastrophic, involuntary, uncontrollable, and poorly understood risks
by laypeople
- Experts view risk as expected annual mortality
- Public views risk as trust in institutions, equity, and potential damage to lifestyle and
environment
Example:
Laypeople perceive nuclear power to be high-risk due to catastrophic events like
Chernobyl (availability heuristic) while experts deem it to be statistically low risk
compared to other energy sources like coal or gas
Psychometric paradigm
- The public amplifies risk through a set of qualitative characteristics like dread,
familiarity, and voluntariness of exposure
- Risk perceptions cluster among dread risk (perceived lack of control, catastrophic
potential) and unknown risk (observability, novelty, immediacy)
- Measuring the dimensions of dread and unknown risk can predict what the public will
perceive as worthy of public concern, political debate, and demands for regulation
regardless of an event’s true probability
Example:
Experts rank driving as more risky than flying, but many people fear flying more due
to its catastrophic potential and lack of personal control (dread) as well as
unfamiliarity with plane technology (unknown)
Experiential learning in risk perception
- Based on a fast, intuitive system that prioritizes how something feels over its
statistical probability (affect heuristic)
- Personal experiences with disaster make risk perceptions more intense and
longstanding thus more resistant to expert advice and factual information
- Recent, dramatic events are easily brought to mind (availability bias) making it more
likely to overestimate the likelihood of catastrophic though statistically improbable
events
Example:
Someone who has never experienced a flood before might feel like flood insurance is
an unwarranted expense whereas their neighbour, who has experienced flooding
before, might overestimate future risk and potentially over-pay for insurance
coverage
Social representation theory in risk perception
- Risk isn’t perceived on an individual level but rather through social representations
that turn the unknown into a common, knowable reality
- Process involves fitting unfamiliar risk into preexisting categories (anchoring) and
turning the abstract into concrete examples (objectification)
- Adopting a shared viewpoint strengthens group bonds by labeling who is “us” and
who is “them”
