‘Living on the edge’: using cognitive filters to appraise experience of environmental risk

Individuals respond to an experience of risk, both in attitudinal and behavioural terms as a result of how that experience is interpreted and appraised. Experience of local flooding can in theory, inform individuals’ attitudes towards climate change. This trend however, is not observed in all cases and is highly dependent on the local, situational context. This paper postulates that the variation observed in attitudinal and behavioural responses by farmers to climate change following experiences of local flooding can, in part, be explained by the Cognitive Filters of Experience Appraisal Model introduced in this paper. The model is developed firstly through a review of the existing literature concerning appraisal (cognitive and experience). Secondly, the model is framed by empirical research via fifteen face to face interviews with farmers in Gloucestershire, England, who have all directly experienced flooding in recent years. The study is exploratory in nature, and the qualitative data serve as contextualised accounts of the different patterns of experience appraisal. The paper contributes to existing literature by developing current understandings of experience appraisal as well as providing qualitative detail to an area which has generally only been researched quantitatively. The model of experience appraisal which is put forward could be applied to multiple contexts of environmental risk.     

Consumers’ avoidance of information on red meat risks: information exposure effects on attitudes and perceived knowledge

In accordance with cognitive dissonance theory, individuals generally avoid information that is not consistent with their cognitions, to avoid psychological discomfort associated with tensions arising from contradictory beliefs. Information avoidance may thus make risk communication less successful. To address this, we presented information on red meat risks to red meat consumers. To explore information exposure effects, attitudes toward red meat and perceived knowledge of red meat risks were measured before, immediately after, and two weeks after exposure. We expected information avoidance of red meat risks to be: positively related to (1) study discontentment; and (2) positive attitudes toward red meat; and negatively related to (3) information seeking on red meat risks; and (4) systematic and heuristic processing of information. In addition, following exposure to the risk information, we expected that (5) individuals who scored high in avoidance of red meat risks information to change their attitudes and perceived risk knowledge less than individuals who scored low in avoidance. Results were in line with the first three expectations. Support for the fourth was partial insofar as this was only confirmed regarding systematic processing. The final prediction was not confirmed; individuals who scored high in avoidance decreased the positivity of their attitudes and increased their perceived knowledge in a similar fashion to those who scored low in avoidance. These changes stood over the two-week follow-up period. Results are discussed in accordance with cognitive dissonance theory, with the possible use of suppression strategies, and with the corresponding implications for risk communication practice.     

The effects of risk‐taking tendency on risk choice and pre‐ and post‐decisional information selection

Ideally, people seek and select information about unfamiliar risks with which they are confronted, before they make a risk choice. This study investigated what happens when people do not have this opportunity. The main question was how risk‐taking tendency influences intuitive risk decisions and how this impacts subsequent information search and subsequent choices. In the present study, participants had to make a choice about an unfamiliar risk, either before or after they had had the opportunity to search for (risk‐promoting or risk‐averse) information. In the condition where they could only seek for information after they had made a choice, they had to reconsider their first choice and make a second risk choice. We expected that (1) risk‐taking tendency would impact people's risk choices, but only in the situation where they have little information. On the basis of cognitive dissonance theory, it was furthermore predicted that (2) risk‐taking tendency and (3) initial risk choice would affect risk information selection. Furthermore, we predicted that (4) the first risk choice and (5) the risk information selected would influence the subsequent risk choice. The results suggest that if people make a first, intuitive decision about an unknown risk, risk‐taking tendency has an effect on the choice, but that this does not happen when people can first select information. Risk‐taking tendency did not influence information selection, but initial choice did (although in another way than we expected). Furthermore, both the first risk choice and the risk information selected affected subsequent risk choices. These findings suggest that people often make initial intuitive decisions that are influenced by personality characteristics, and that are subsequently difficult to change.     

企业风险管理中的风险沟通机制研究

ERM是当今企业风险管理的核心标准,风险沟通是风险管理的重要方法,但企业风险沟通的研究尚不完备。本文将社会公共领域的风险沟通理论与COSO框架下的企业风险管理相结合,提出了一个风险沟通的理论假说,以全面风险感知、相互信任、伙伴关系和双向沟通模式作为该假说的四大支柱,以全面综合的方法,从企业内部(纵向)和企业外部(横向)两个维度构建了企业风险沟通体系,期望能够为企业层面的风险沟通发挥积极的作用。     

基于认知-情绪交互视角的产品伤害危机沟通实证研究

从认知-情绪交互的视角出发,考量消费者的认知评价、负面情绪和行为倾向之间的关系。结果表明,危机沟通方式会导致不同强度的负面情绪,而负面情绪则显著地影响被调查者的认知评价以及行为倾向,鉴于此,应将关注消费者情绪提升到企业危机沟通的战略高度。     

Risk cultures and dominant approaches towards disasters in seven European countries

This paper builds upon the risk culture concept started with Mary Douglas’ and Aaron Wildavsky’s seminal work on risk and culture. Based upon the empirical results of a qualitative sociological study on sociocultural factors affecting risk perception and crisis communication in seven European countries, a theoretical model, illustrating how differences in disasters framing imply diverse approaches to risk and disaster management, is suggested. According to this framework, culturally bounded assumptions and conventions strongly influence how communities make sense of risks and hazards and how these communities consider some ways of dealing with disasters more appropriate than others. The framework suggested in this article distinguishes between risk cultures of a given society, which do not necessarily respond to nation states. In order to explain differences in how cultures deal with risks and disasters, and to define the main features of our typology, three main interrelated dimensions have been selected: disaster framing, trust in authorities and blaming. By analyzing differences and similarities in how people perceive and interpret disasters, as well as to whom the responsibility for risk prevention and crisis management is attributed, in seven European countries, three specific ideal types of risk cultures emerged: state-oriented risk culture, individual-oriented risk culture and fatalistic risk culture. Implications for crisis management and communication in case of a disaster will be addressed for each of these risk cultures.     

The action suited to the word? Use of the framework of risk information seeking to understand risk-related behaviors

Although a growing body of risk communication research focuses on how people process risk information, one question that is overlooked is how the seeking of information contributes to behavioral adaptation toward the risk issue. How are people’s behavioral responses to risks affected by the search for risk information? Building on the Framework of Risk Information Seeking (FRIS), this paper reports on two studies that focus on the experimental testing of several of the basic FRIS assumptions. In study 1, a 2 (involvement: high vs. low)?×?2 (risk perception: high vs. low) between-subjects experiment was conducted to test the assumption that higher levels of involvement and risk perception stimulate the intention to seek additional risk information as well as the actual risk information. Study 2 is a partial replication of study 1. In study 2, a 2 (involvement: high vs. low)?×?2 (fear appeal: present vs. absent)?×?2 (response efficacy: high vs. low) between-subjects experiment was conducted to test how varying the levels of involvement, risk perception, and response efficacy influence actual and intended information seeking, as well as the intention to adopt risk-mitigating actions. The results showed that the high-involvement, high-risk perception, high-response efficacy group was most likely to actually seek information and make behavioral changes. The results are in accordance with basic FRIS assumptions. Implications for risk communication are discussed.