Literature DB >> 21767064

Communicating environmental risks: Clarifying the severity effect in interpretations of verbal probability expressions.

Adam J L Harris1, Adam Corner.   

Abstract

Verbal probability expressions are frequently used to communicate risk and uncertainty. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), for example, uses them to convey risks associated with climate change. Given the potential for human action to mitigate future environmental risks, it is important to understand how people respond to these expressions. In 3 studies employing a novel manipulation of event severity (so as to avoid any confound with event base rate), we demonstrated a systematic effect of event severity on the interpretation of verbal probability expressions. Challenging a previous finding in the literature, expressions referring to a severe event were interpreted as indicating a higher probability than those referring to a more neutral event. The finding was demonstrated in scenarios communicating risks relating to climate change (Studies 1 and 2) and replicated in scenarios involving nanotechnology and nuclear materials (Study 3). This is the first direct demonstration of an effect of outcome severity on the interpretation of verbal probability expressions, correcting a previous (potentially problematic) conclusion attributable to a flawed experimental design.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21767064     DOI: 10.1037/a0024195

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  6 in total

1.  Understanding the relationship between illness perceptions of breast cancer and perceived risk in a sample of U.A.E. female university students: the role of comparative risk.

Authors:  Maria J Figueiras; David Dias Neto; João Marôco
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2022-05-25       Impact factor: 2.742

2.  Communicating the uncertainty in estimated greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture.

Authors:  Alice E Milne; Margaret J Glendining; R Murray Lark; Sarah A M Perryman; Taylor Gordon; Andrew P Whitmore
Journal:  J Environ Manage       Date:  2015-07-16       Impact factor: 6.789

3.  Unrealistic comparative optimism: An unsuccessful search for evidence of a genuinely motivational bias.

Authors:  Adam J L Harris; Laura de Molière; Melinda Soh; Ulrike Hahn
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Verbal probabilities: Very likely to be somewhat more confusing than numbers.

Authors:  Bonnie C Wintle; Hannah Fraser; Ben C Wills; Ann E Nicholson; Fiona Fidler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-17       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  A Study on the Sufficient Conditional and the Necessary Conditional With Chinese and French Participants.

Authors:  Jing Shao; Dilane Tikiri Banda; Jean Baratgin
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-02-24

6.  How Do Healthy Women Perceive the Risk of Breast Cancer? The Role of Illness Perceptions and Compared Risk between Portugal and the U.A.E.

Authors:  Maria J Figueiras; David Dias Neto; Joao Marôco; Catarina Carmo
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-10-09       Impact factor: 4.614

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.