Risk perception as a function of risk exposure amongst rock climbers |
| |
| Authors: | Cecile Martha Xavier Sanchez Montserrat Gomà-i-Freixanet |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Institut des Sciences du Mouvement E.J. Marey, Université de la Méditerranée, 163 avenue de Luminy, CP 910, 13288 Marseille Cedex 9, France;2. University of Chester, Chester, UK;3. Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain;1. Department of Sports Orthopedics–Sportsmedicine, Klinikum Bamberg (Dr Schöffl);2. Department of Traumasurgery, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg (Dr Schöffl);3. Medical Commission of the Union Internationale des Associations d’Alpinisme (Drs Schöffl and Küpper);4. Medical Commission of the International Federation of Sport Climbing (Dr Schöffl);5. CEO Rocca GmbH, DAV Kletterzentrum, Stuttgart (Mr Hoffmann);6. Institute of Occupational and Social Medicine, RWTH Aachen University (Dr Küpper);1. Department of Sports Medicine–Sports Orthopedics, Klinikum Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany (Drs V. Schöffl and Popp);2. Department of Trauma Surgery, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany (Dr V Schöffl);3. Institute of Occupational and Social Medicine, RWTH Aachen Technical University, Aachen, Germany (Dr Küpper);4. Department of Pediatrics, Klinikum Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany (Dr I Schöffl);1. CVPath Institute, Gaithersburg, MD (Dr Lutter);2. Department of Sports Orthopedics, Sports Medicine, Sports Traumatology, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Klinikum Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany (Drs Lutter and Schöffl);3. Department of Hand Surgery, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland (Dr Schweizer);4. Private Hospital Hochrum, Innsbruck, Austria (Dr Hochholzer);5. Department of Radiology, Friedrich Alexander University, Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany (Dr Bayer);6. Department of Trauma and Orthopedic Surgery, Friedrich Alexander University, Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany (Dr Schöffl);1. Centre d’Etude des Transformations des Activités Physiques et Sportives (CETAPS) – EA 3832, University of Rouen, Faculty of Sports Sciences, France;2. Laboratoire d’Informatique, de Traitement de l’Information et des Systèmes (LITIS) – EA 4108, National Institute of Applied Sciences (INSA), Rouen, France;3. School of Human Movement Studies, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia;1. Department of Sports Orthopedics, Sports Medicine, Sports Traumatology, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Klinikum Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany (Drs Schöffl, Lutter, and Popp);2. Department of Trauma and Orthopedic Surgery, Friedrich Alexander University, Erlangen-Nuremberg, Nuremberg, Germany (Dr Schöffl);3. the CVPath Institute, Gaithersburg, MD (Dr Lutter) |
| |
| Abstract: | ObjectivesThe first objective was to examine the extent to which climbers' climbing safety perceived competence (CSPC) and perceived own absolute (POAR) and comparative (PCR) risk of getting seriously injured whilst climbing is related to risk exposure. The second objective was to examine which variables influence POAR and PCR.MethodTwo hundred and thirty-five climbers (M = 32, SD = 10.2 years of age) completed the following questionnaires: a CSPC scale specifically developed to assess perceived ability to practice climbing safely; indirect measures of PCR, consisting in the subtraction of the participants' assessment of their own risks from their assessment of other climbing referents' risks; and the Life Orientation Test-Revised, measuring dispositional optimism (DO). Participants were approached in their practices sites from Mediterranean regions, and were divided into groups based on their climbing practice's risk exposure; that is, high risk: traditional climbing (TRAD; n = 42); moderate risk: leading (LEAD; n = 89); and low risk: either top-roping (TOP; n = 51) or indoor bouldering (IND; n = 53).ResultsAnalyses of variance showed that TRAD expressed higher CSPC and higher POAR than the other groups. PCR also differed amongst the groups. More specifically, TRAD expressed comparative pessimism and LEAD expressed comparative optimism, as their POAR was, respectively, higher and lower than their perceived average climber's risk. TOP and IND perceived their own risk in a similar way to that of the average climber. Regression analyses showed that DO did not influence POAR or PCR. Past injury episode was positively related to POAR and negatively related to the propensity to express comparative optimism, though only amongst TRAD and LEAD.ConclusionsClimbers' risk perception accurately reflected their risk exposure. Climbers whose climbing modality involves higher risks acknowledged so when evaluating their own absolute and comparative risks of getting seriously injured whilst climbing. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
