风险认知研究概况及理论框架

随着国家整体经济的发展,风险问题越来越多地受到各方面的关注．因而,风险认知研究也愈显示出其重要性．“风险认知”指个体对存在于外界环境中的各种客观风险的感受和认识,且强调个体由直观判断和主观感受获得的经验对个体认知的影响．“心理测量范式”是风险认知研究所遵循的理论框架,它提供了一种包含各种心理测量技术的理论思路．风险认知研究有助于风险分析,风险评估,风险管理等工作,并制约着有关政策的制定．     

风险投资从业人员的风险认知及其影响因素研究

本文根据Slovic等人提出的心理测量范式,设计了风险投资从业人员的风险认知研究问卷。对收集的数据用SPSS软件进行统计分析发现,风险投资从业人员对风险投资各风险因素有不同的风险认知结构,影响其风险认知结构的个人背景因素主要有年龄和单位性质。此外,性别和年龄、性别和专业的交互作用对其风险认知结构有极其显著的影响,性别和职务的交互作用对其风险认知结构有显著影响。     

环境中的风险认知特征

采用多维度的心理测量范式,研究公众在“影响程度”、“可控性”、“了解程度”、“影响的持续性”、“发生的可能性”、“结果的严重性”六个维度上对39个环境条目的风险认知特征。研究结果验证了“风险程度指标”,并将环境风险划分为“生态环境”“疾病与灾害”“生活环境”三个大类并探讨其风险认知特征。结果显示,由“客观认识”和“主动作用”两维度形成的认知地图可有效地指导风险沟通。     

消费心理学中的风险认知

文章回顾了消费心理学研究中有关风险认知的文献,对于双因素模型、多维度模型、复杂模型和整合模型等风险认知的概念模型进行了综合介绍,并分析了影响消费者风险认知的因素、产品风险与服务风险的差异以及降低风险认知的策略。文章最后展望了消费者风险认知的研究趋势,尤其是电子商务中的风险认知问题。     

公众风险认知调查

1　引言人们的社会生活会受到广泛存在的各种风险因素的影响 ,有时甚至因为一些特定的原因 ,某些因素对社会及人们的生活可以产生巨大的不良后果。事实上 ,公众的风险认知状况是社会状况的晴雨表 ,它可以相当确切地反映出整个社会发展、变化对人们心理状况造成的影响以及人们的反应。因此 ,公众风险认知状况是非常重要的社会指标。一些社会变化 ,比如下岗 ,成为人们关注的敏感性问题 ;随之而来的其它社会性风险问题也同样会影响人们的心理状态 ,从而成为整个社会性的问题。本研究采用风险认知的研究方法 ,了解人们如何认识目前我国变化的形…     

我国民众对SARS信息的风险认知及心理行为

采用分层抽样的调查方法,对全国17个城市的4231名市民进行了SARS疫情中风险认知特征和心理行为的研究。结果发现：（1）负性信息,包括患病信息和与自身关系密切的信息,更易引起民众的高风险认知; 正性信息,包括治愈信息和政府防范措施的信息,能降低个体风险认知水平。（2）我国民众5月中旬风险认知因素空间位置分析结果表明, SARS病因处于不熟悉和难以控制一端,“愈后对身体的影响和有无传染性”处于不熟悉一端,这是引起民众风险意识的主要因素。（3）结构方程分析结果表明,SARS疫情信息是通过风险认知对个体的应对行为、心理健康产生影响的, 并初步验证了风险评估、心理紧张度、应对行为和心理健康等指标对于危机事件中民众心理行为的预测作用     

健康医疗中的风险认知

在健康医疗领域,风险认知是预测医疗决策和健康行为的重要因素.而非专业人士的风险认知不仅受到风险性质的影响,还受到风险信息的框架、载体、认知定势、以及个体的认知方式、动机、情感等因素的影响.临床咨询和医患交流应通过一定的策略来提高风险沟通的效果,降低医疗风险.     

危机情境中的期望差异效应

本文提出了期望差异效应的概念并细致阐述了期望差异效应可能是导致风险沟通障碍的原因。期望差异效应是指处于同一情境中的一方对另一方的期望与另一方自我期望之间的差异。围绕上述问题,研究者在阐述了期望差异效应的含义以及期望差异效应可能的心理表征和认知根源之后,细致分析了期望差异效应的强化因素及其可能导致的风险沟通障碍。有关期望差异效应的研究尚处于起步阶段,界定期望差异效应的心理表征,确定期望差异效应的测量工具,探索期望差异效应的影响因素以及分析期望差异效应与风险沟通障碍的关系等都可以作为未来的研究方向。     

认知需求和认知闭合需求对风险决策中外语效应的影响

外语效应指相比于母语背景,个体在外语背景下风险决策偏差会降低。针对影响外语效应的因素研究大多聚焦于外部因素和与个体外语水平相关的因素,少有研究探讨认知风格的作用。本研究通过524名成人被试,探索认知需求和认知闭合需求对外语效应的影响。结果表明:(1)风险决策中存在外语效应,相比于母语背景,外语背景下框架效应被削弱,且个体更偏向风险寻求。(2)对于认知需求和认知闭合需求都高或都低的个体,语言类型会影响风险决策,在母语环境下倾向于风险规避,在外语环境下倾向于风险寻求;而对于认知需求和认知闭合需求高低不一致的个体,语言类型对其风险决策倾向的影响不显著。本研究为认知风格如何综合影响风险决策提供了进一步的证据。     

工作情景中员工风险认知研究

本研究是风险认知系列研究之一 ,目的是探讨和比较企业中员工及管理人员的风险认知状况 ,以及员工与管理人员认知上的异同。研究采用问卷设计的方法。结果表明 :1员工对 2 0个风险因素的风险程度认知均超过了中性水平 ,“企业效益”仍然被知觉为最高风险点 ;2风险因素空间结构分析 ,进一步证实了风险特征变量间稳定的关系 ,同时也说明本系列研究方法上的合理性 ;3各风险特征变量间的相关 ,反映了员工风险认知中的各种特征 ;4(本研究经过信度和效度检验均达到可接受水平。     

Perception of risk in genetic counseling

Abstract

Genetic counseling is a psychological process of communicating and perceiving information about risks. As such, it is important to assess how information is understood by counselees and how psychological factors affect risk perception. Subjects were 76 patients at a genetic clinic whose understanding of genetic counseling was assessed, along with their motivation and way of thinking about risks. Results indicated that subjective interpretations of recurrence risks are better predictors of their reproductive intentions than the “objective” risks. Also, specific cognitive and motivational factors appear to explain much of the variance in risk perception in genetic counseling. The results have important implications for how counseling is conducted, as well as for theoretical issues about cognitive processes.     

怎样会让我们感觉更危险 ——风险沟通渠道分析

以实验设计与问卷测量相结合的方法,向被试提供真实的环境风险材料,探讨不同类型的（人为或自然）风险、形象性信息、不同感觉通道的信息输入（声音或文字）,以及不同沟通渠道对风险认知的影响。实验一采用实验室设计,发现人为风险比自然风险引起更高的风险认知,形象性信息的呈现增加了风险认知,但不同感觉通道的信息输入对风险认知没有影响。实验二模拟现实生活中电视和网页对风险信息的传递,比较两种沟通渠道对风险认知的影响,结果表明电视比网页唤起更高的风险认知     

Risk Perception and Psychological Distress in Genetic Counselling for Hereditary Breast and/or Ovarian Cancer

Oncological Genetic Counselling (CGO) allows the identification of a genetic component that increases the risk of developing a cancer. Individuals’ psychological reactions are influenced by both the content of the received information and the subjective perception of their own risk of becoming ill or being a carrier of a genetic mutation. This study included 120 participants who underwent genetic counselling for breast and/or ovarian cancer. The aim of the study was to examine the relation between their cancer risk perception and the genetic risk during CGO before receiving genetic test results, considering the influence of some psychological variables, in particular distress, anxiety and depression. Participants completed the following tools during a psychological interview: a socio-demographic form, Cancer Risk Perception (CRP) and Genetic Risk Perception (GRP), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Distress Thermometer (DT). The data seem to confirm our hypothesis. Positive and significant correlations were found between the observed variables. Moreover, genetic risk perception determined an increase in depressive symptomatology and cancer risk perception led to an increase in anxious symptomatology, specifically in participants during cancer treatment. The present results suggest the importance of assessing genetic and cancer risk perception in individuals who undergo CGO, to identify those who are at risk of a decrease in psychological well-being and of developing greater psychological distress.     

A comparison of the risk‐taking behaviors of prisoners and non‐prisoners

Do prisoners and non‐prisoners differ in their risk‐taking behavior and the domains where they take risks? Surprisingly little psychological research has addressed these questions, despite the well‐established paradigms and extensive literature on risk taking among non‐prison populations. To fill this gap, we used the Domain‐Specific Risk‐Taking Scale to compare 75 male prisoners' and 75 male non‐prisoners' risk‐taking behavior, risk perception, and risk benefit in five domains (ethical, financial, health, recreational, and social). Our results show that prisoners and non‐prisoners did not differ in their risk‐taking behavior in the ethical, financial, recreational, or social domains. In the health domain, however, prisoners exhibited significantly higher risk‐taking tendencies. With regard to risk perception, prisoners perceived activities as significantly more risky than non‐prisoners, aside from the financial domain where non‐prisoners reported significantly higher risk perception. In all five domains, prisoners perceived risk‐taking activities as offering fewer benefits compared to the non‐prisoner sample. Our results also indicate that risk‐taking activities are better predicted by the expected benefits than by risk perception for both prisoners and non‐prisoners in the recreational, financial, and ethical domains. However, for prisoners, risk taking in the social domain increased with level of perceived benefit. In the health domain, prisoners' risk taking decreased with increasing level of perceived risk, whereas for non‐prisoners, perceived benefits, but not risk perception, predicted risk taking. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Individual cognitive style affects flood-risk perception and mitigation intentions

Risk perception of natural hazards has been widely studied as one of the potential determinants of people's behaviors and behavioral intentions. However, individual differences can also affect risk perception. The present work focused on the link between an individual cognitive mindset (i.e., level of holism) and flood-risk perception. It also assessed the consequences of such a link on public and personal mitigation intentions, taking into account the sense of connection with the environment, the psychological distance from the adverse event, and the role played by previous personal experience with flooding. Our study (N = 191) showed that the individual cognitive style predicted risk perceptions and personal (for both experienced and no-experience groups) and public (only for experienced group) mitigation intentions, through the mediation of the sense of connection with the environment and the psychological distance from the adverse event. Results are discussed in terms of their practical implications for public communication and policies about environmental hazards.     

Risk Factors for Alcoholism Among Women Religious: Affect Regulation

Risk factors for addiction have received extensive empirical attention. Specific risk factors for women Religious (nuns), however, are not well known. This report examines risk factors for alcoholism in a retrospective study of 148 chemically dependent women Religious in treatment. Negative emotionality, a personality measure, was the only significant predictor of alcoholism severity in a joint multiple regression with childhood trauma, parental alcoholism, mental health history, ego strength, and self esteem. These findings imply that treatment of this group in chemical-dependency programs needs to include psychological modalities beyond the traditional psychoeducation in order to adequately address difficulties in affect regulation.     

压力下一搏：压力如何影响个体风险寻求

压力促使个体风险寻求已得到许多研究的验证和支持, 但对于该现象背后的根本机制缺乏深入探讨和整合。模型指出, 压力诱发认知资源损耗和心理需要失衡, 导致个体执行控制功能减弱, 奖赏寻求增加, 这两者引起对风险选项价值的高估、风险感知的降低和启发式决策策略的使用, 最终导致风险寻求。期望效用论、预期理论、双系统理论和风险敏感理论的视角能各有侧重地解析模型中的路径。最后, 基于模型梳理了边界条件, 并提出未来可关注压力下执行功能、认知和情绪的交互以及慢性压力的影响和调控。     

Risk perception and the location of a repository for spent nuclear fuel

This study investigates lay people's reactions to a repository for nuclear waste. Risk perception is seen as a complex concept, comprising both affective and cognitive components. Attitude towards nuclear power and trust in experts and authorities had a substantial impact on risk perception, while personal knowledge about nuclear waste disposal had no effect. Thus, the more positive one's attitude towards nuclear power is and the more trust one has in experts and authorities, the lower one's risk perception is. Also, reactions were expected to vary with distance between the home district and the location of a repository. These variations differed in nature for people with alternative levels of risk judgement. The distance between the home and a repository affected approval of the proposed site. Distance between home and repository also had an effect on risk feelings and somewhat less on beliefs about consequences. Estimated total risk was directly mediated by beliefs about consequences, but even more so by risk feelings. With regard to risk, one can conclude that it is important to make a distinction between an emotional and a cognitive component of risk perception.     

Risk Perception and Affect

ABSTRACT— Humans perceive and act on risk in two fundamental ways. Risk as feelings refers to individuals' instinctive and intuitive reactions to danger. Risk as analysis brings logic, reason, and scientific deliberation to bear on risk management. Reliance on risk as feelings is described as "the affect heuristic." This article traces the development of this heuristic and discusses some of the important ways that it impacts how people perceive and evaluate risk.     

How much risk can you stomach? Individual differences in the tolerance of perceived risk across gender and risk domain

Research within the psychological risk–return framework, namely, using the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking scale, has led to a conclusion that risk attitude—measured as an individual's sensitivity to the risk they perceive—is stable across people (e.g., gender) and domains (e.g., recreational, social, financial, & health). Risk taking differences across gender and domain have been interpreted in terms of differences in the magnitude of risk perceived (and expected benefit). Yet the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking scale items, contrived by researchers rather than decision makers themselves, may have failed to detect differences in perceived risk attitude by failing to adequately represent all combinations of risks and benefits across gender and domains. In Study 1, participants generated their own examples of activities, which we selected among in Studies 2 and 3 to construct a new scale representing various levels of perceived risk and expected benefit. Our findings reveal that women are more sensitive than men to risk they perceive (i.e., are less tolerant of risk) in the recreational, social, and financial domains but not in the health domain. Risk attitude also differed across domains, with participants tolerating more risk in some domains than in others. We conclude that gender and domain differences in risk taking stem partly from gender and domain differences in people's sensitivity to perceived risks. Our findings have theoretical implications for the psychological risk–return framework and bridge with other theoretical approaches, such as the expected utility framework. Our studies also provide a new scale for assessing differences in attitudes toward risk that overcomes shortcomings of existing scales.