Determinants and Consequences of Perceived Risk. Lennart Sjöberg, Center for Risk Research, Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden
Perceived risk is often assumed to
be a central factor in social and political dilemmas. It is related
to the "acceptance" of technology, and to lifestyle
risks associated with, e.g., smoking and alcohol consumption.
Consequently, perceived risk is an important concept and has
been subjected to intense research attention during the preceding
decades. Attempts to account for perceived risk have been presented
as the Psychometric Model by the Oregon group and as Cultural
Theory of risk perception by Douglas and Wildavsky. These approaches
are briefly reviewed, noting that they account for no more than
20 percent (Psychometric Model) or 5-10 percent (Cultural Theory)
of the variance of perceived risk across individuals. The widespread
credibility that these approaches enjoy seems to be due to statistical
illusions. The psychometric model is often combined with the
trust concept, but current data on trust and perceived risk in
Sweden suggest that the importance of that variable may be culturally
contingent - previous data being mostly from North America and
of doubtful European relevance. An alternative, bringing in attitudes
and specific risk factors accounts for more than 60 percent
of the variance. As for consequences, it is demonstrated that
demand for risk reduction is not well explained by perceived risk,
nor is attitude to insurance and prevention. Perceived risk is
mainly related to perceived probability of future harm, while
demand for risk mitigation and related concepts are better explained
by the seriousness of the consequences of a harmful event, or
injury. A final comment is connected with worry and anxiety;
these more emotional types of reactions are but weakly related
to perceived risk, yet often used as synonyms.