Cross-Cultural Comparisons of Risk Perception: The Meaning of Intra-National and Cross-National Differences for Risk Communication. B. Rohrmann, University of Melbourne, Dept. of Psychology, Parkville 3052, Australia
In psychometric research on the cognition and subjective evaluation of hazards, an increasing interest in cross-cultural studies has evolved, questioning the concept that risk perception can be treated in terms of `communalities' or `universals'. Rather, the evaluative process of risk perception might be determined by the norms, value systems and cultural idiosyncrasies of societies or societal subgroups. Cross-cultural differences can be studied from two perspectives: In cross-national studies, data from different countries are compared. In intra-national "cross-group" comparisons, differences in risk evaluation between societal groups (defined according to social/political orientations) would be analyzed. The proposed paper presents findings from two studies, one conducted in Germany, Australia and New Zealand (N=217+272+224) and one currently running in Australia and China (N=210+360). The sampling was focussed on four societal groups: People with a "technological", "monetarian", "ecological", or "feminist" orientation. Twenty-four hazards were judged with respect to 12 risk aspects, representing a structural risk perception model. The results demonstrate the strong influence of socio-psychological factors and the cultural quality of risk evaluations. Generally, group differences are stronger than cross-country ones, particularly with respect to technological hazards. The findings are valuable for a better understanding of societal risk controversies and designing comprehensive risk information, communication and education programs.