Literature DB >> 12731818

The function of credibility in information processing for risk perception.

Craig W Trumbo1, Katherine A McComas.   

Abstract

This study examines how credibility affects the way people process information and how they subsequently perceive risk. Three conceptual areas are brought together in this analysis: the psychometric model of risk perception, Eagly and Chaiken's heuristic-systematic information processing model, and Meyer's credibility index. Data come from a study of risk communication in the circumstance of state health department investigations of suspected cancer clusters (five cases, N = 696). Credibility is assessed for three information sources: state health departments, citizen groups, and industries involved in each case. Higher credibility for industry and the state directly predicts lower risk perception, whereas high credibility for citizen groups predicts greater risk perception. A path model shows that perceiving high credibility for industry and state-and perceiving low credibility for citizen groups-promotes heuristic processing, which in turn is a strong predictor of lower risk perception. Alternately, perceiving industry and the state to have low credibility also promotes greater systematic processing, which consistently leads to perception of greater risk. Between a one-fifth and one-third of the effect of credibility on risk perception is shown to be indirectly transmitted through information processing.

Entities:  

Year:  2003        PMID: 12731818     DOI: 10.1111/1539-6924.00313

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  14 in total

1.  Development of a fuzzy-stochastic programming with Green Z-score criterion method for planning water resources systems with a trading mechanism.

Authors:  X T Zeng; G H Huang; Y P Li; J L Zhang; Y P Cai; Z P Liu; L R Liu
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2016-09-29       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  Technical assistance in the field of risk communication.

Authors:  Laura Maxim; Mario Mazzocchi; Stephan Van den Broucke; Fabiana Zollo; Tobin Robinson; Claire Rogers; Domagoj Vrbos; Giorgia Zamariola; Anthony Smith
Journal:  EFSA J       Date:  2021-04-29

3.  Anxiety, worry and cognitive risk estimate in relation to protective behaviors during the 2009 influenza A/H1N1 pandemic in Hong Kong: ten cross-sectional surveys.

Authors:  Qiuyan Liao; Benjamin J Cowling; Wendy W T Lam; Diane M W Ng; Richard Fielding
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2014-03-27       Impact factor: 3.090

4.  The "Land of Fires" Toxic Waste Scandal and Its Effect on Consumer Food Choices.

Authors:  Luigi Cembalo; Daniela Caso; Valentina Carfora; Francesco Caracciolo; Alessia Lombardi; Gianni Cicia
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-01-08       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  An Analysis of Government Communication in the United States During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Recommendations for Effective Government Health Risk Communication.

Authors:  Do Kyun David Kim; Gary L Kreps
Journal:  World Med Health Policy       Date:  2020-08-27

6.  The effect of risk framing on support for restrictive government policy regarding the COVID-19 outbreak.

Authors:  Kirill Chmel; Aigul Klimova; Nikita Savin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  An experimental investigation of resilience decision making in repeated disasters.

Authors:  Noah C Dormady; Robert T Greenbaum; Kim A Young
Journal:  Environ Syst Decis       Date:  2021-06-07

8.  The effect of social trust on citizens’ health risk perception in the context of a petrochemical industrial complex.

Authors:  Miguel Angel López-Navarro; Jaume Llorens-Monzonís; Vicente Tortosa-Edo
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2013-01-21       Impact factor: 3.390

9.  Risk perception in fire evacuation behavior revisited: definitions, related concepts, and empirical evidence.

Authors:  Max T Kinateder; Erica D Kuligowski; Paul A Reneke; Richard D Peacock
Journal:  Fire Sci Rev       Date:  2015-01-08

10.  The effect of ad hominem attacks on the evaluation of claims promoted by scientists.

Authors:  Ralph M Barnes; Heather M Johnston; Noah MacKenzie; Stephanie J Tobin; Chelsea M Taglang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.