Literature DB >> 16022691

A disciplinary perspective on the epistemological status of risk.

Catherine E Althaus1.   

Abstract

A unique multidisciplinary perspective on the risk literature is used to establish a fresh and provocative argument regarding the epistemological understanding and definition of risk. Building on economic conceptualizations that distinguish risk from uncertainty and argue that risk is an ordered application of knowledge to the unknown, the survey identifies each of the disciplines as having a particular knowledge approach with which they confront the unknown so as to order its randomness and convert it into a risk proposition. This epistemological approach suggests the concept of risk can act as a mirror, reflecting the preoccupations, strengths, and weaknesses of each discipline as they grapple with uncertainty. The conclusion suggests that the different disciplines can, and desirably should, act in concert toward a cumulative appreciation of risk that progresses our understanding of the concept. One way in which the article challenges risk experts to join disciplinary forces in a collaborative effort is to holistically appreciate and articulate the concept of political risk calculation.

Year:  2005        PMID: 16022691     DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00625.x

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


  10 in total

1.  Rethinking risk assessment for emerging technology first-in-human trials.

Authors:  Anna Genske; Sabrina Engel-Glatter
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2016-03

Review 2.  Accepting risk in clinical research: is the gene therapy field becoming too risk-averse?

Authors:  Claire T Deakin; Ian E Alexander; Ian Kerridge
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2009-09-22       Impact factor: 11.454

3.  Effects of disciplinary cultures of researchers and research trainees on the acceptability of nanocarriers for drug delivery in different contexts of use: a mixed-methods study.

Authors:  Vanessa Chenel; Patrick Boissy; Jean-Pierre Cloarec; Johane Patenaude
Journal:  J Nanopart Res       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 2.253

4.  The acceptability of nanocarriers for drug delivery in different contexts of use: perceptions of researchers and research trainees in the field of new technologies.

Authors:  Vanessa Chenel; Patrick Boissy; Marie-Sol Poirier; Jean-Pierre Cloarec; Johane Patenaude
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2015-03-16

5.  Scientists' Understandings of Risk of Nanomaterials: Disciplinary Culture Through the Ethnographic Lens.

Authors:  Mikael Johansson; Åsa Boholm
Journal:  Nanoethics       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 0.917

6.  How biological background assumptions influence scientific risk evaluation of stacked genetically modified plants: an analysis of research hypotheses and argumentations.

Authors:  Elena Rocca; Fredrik Andersen
Journal:  Life Sci Soc Policy       Date:  2017-08-14

7.  "Just Carbon": Ideas About Graphene Risks by Graphene Researchers and Innovation Advisors.

Authors:  Rickard Arvidsson; Max Boholm; Mikael Johansson; Monica Lindh de Montoya
Journal:  Nanoethics       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 0.917

8.  Experts' moral views on gene drive technologies: a qualitative interview study.

Authors:  N de Graeff; Karin R Jongsma; Annelien L Bredenoord
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2021-03-08       Impact factor: 2.652

9.  Is It Harmful? A Thomistic Perspective on Risk Science in Social Welfare.

Authors:  Saša Horvat; Piotr Roszak; Brian J Taylor
Journal:  J Relig Health       Date:  2021-11-08

10.  Does information form matter when giving tailored risk information to patients in clinical settings? A review of patients' preferences and responses.

Authors:  Rebecca Harris; Claire Noble; Victoria Lowers
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 2.711

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.