Literature DB >> 22570920

Is knowledge important? Empirical research on nuclear risk communication in two countries.

Tanja Perko1, Nadja Zeleznik, Catrinel Turcanu, Peter Thijssen.   

Abstract

Increasing audience knowledge is often set as a primary objective of risk communication efforts. But is it worthwhile focusing risk communication strategies solely on enhancing specific knowledge? The main research questions tackled in this paper were: (1) if prior audience knowledge related to specific radiation risks is influential for the perception of these risks and the acceptance of communicated messages and (2) if gender, attitudes, risk perception of other radiation risks, confidence in authorities, and living in the vicinity of nuclear/radiological installations may also play an important role in this matter. The goal of this study was to test empirically the mentioned predictors in two independent case studies in different countries. The first case study was an information campaign for iodine pre-distribution in Belgium (N = 1035). The second was the information campaign on long-term radioactive waste disposal in Slovenia (N = 1,200). In both cases, recurrent and intensive communication campaigns were carried out by the authorities aiming, among other things, at increasing specific audience knowledge. Results show that higher prior audience knowledge leads to more willingness to accept communicated messages, but it does not affect people’s perception of the specific risk communicated. In addition, the influence of prior audience knowledge on the acceptance of communicated messages is shown to be no stronger than that of general radiation risk perception. The results in both case studies suggest that effective risk communication has to focus not only on knowledge but also on other more heuristic predictors, such as risk perception or attitudes toward communicated risks.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22570920     DOI: 10.1097/HP.0b013e31823fb5a5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Phys        ISSN: 0017-9078            Impact factor:   1.316


  5 in total

1.  Presenting information on regulation values improves the public's sense of safety: Perceived mercury risk in fish and shellfish and its effects on consumption intention.

Authors:  Michio Murakami; Mai Suzuki; Tomiko Yamaguchi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-12-21       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Educating about radiation risks in high schools: towards improved public understanding of the complexity of low-dose radiation health effects.

Authors:  Andrzej Wojcik; Karim Hamza; Iann Lundegård; Margareta Enghag; Karin Haglund; Leena Arvanitis; Linda Schenk
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2018-11-22       Impact factor: 1.925

3.  Modeling reconstruction-related behavior and evaluation of influences of major information sources.

Authors:  Kosuke Shirai; Nobuaki Yoshizawa; Yoshitake Takebayashi; Michio Murakami
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-08-23       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Proximity (Mis)perception: Public Awareness of Nuclear, Refinery, and Fracking Sites.

Authors:  Benjamin A Lyons; Heather Akin; Natalie Jomini Stroud
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2019-08-27       Impact factor: 4.000

5.  The Effect of Risk Communication on Public Behavior to Non-Conventional Terrorism-Randomized Control Trial.

Authors:  Moran Bodas; Morel Ragoler; Yossi Rabby; Esther Krasner
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-12-29       Impact factor: 3.390

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.