THE INTERRELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERCEIVED KNOWLEDGE, CONTROL AND RISK ASSOCIATED WITH A RANGE OF FOOD-RELATED HAZARDS TARGETED AT THE INDIVIDUAL, OTHER PEOPLE AND SOCIETY
THE INTERRELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERCEIVED KNOWLEDGE, CONTROL AND RISK ASSOCIATED WITH A RANGE OF FOOD-RELATED HAZARDS TARGETED AT THE INDIVIDUAL, OTHER PEOPLE AND SOCIETY
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1745-4565.1994.tb00581.x
复制
发表时间：
1994-03-01
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
SPARKS, P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
FREWER, LJ;SHEPHERD, R;SPARKS, P
对一系列食品相关危害进行了感知风险、感知控制和感知知识之间的关系研究。共完成186份调查问卷；这些设计是为了在三个风险“目标”水平上评估一系列食品相关危害的感知风险——个人风险、他人风险和社会风险。还询问了关于感知控制和感知潜在危害知识的其他问题。结果表明，个体对个人风险的感知低于其他人或社会，与风险特征无关，符合乐观偏见理论。个人控制往往被认为对自己比对他人更重要，对于那些个人控制在概念上是可行的危险。对社会危害的感知控制被赋予了社会。人们认为个人对某种危险的了解要比其他人多。感知控制与感知风险之间没有直接关系，但感知知识与感知控制之间存在直接关系。结果在乐观偏差和控制错觉的框架内进行了讨论。得出的结论是，这种影响的机制取决于潜在危害本身的感知特征。乐观偏见和对潜在危险的更多认知可以解释公共信息运动的失败；个人会认为他们对危险是无懈可击的，而且信息是针对比他们知识更少的人的。
The relationship between perceived risk perceived control and perceived knowledge was investigated for a range of food related hazards. One hundred and eighty six questionnaires were completed; these were designed to assess perceived risk for a range of food related hazards at three levels of risk ''target'' - personal risk, risk for other people, and risk for society. Additional questions about perceived control and perceived knowledge for the potential hazards were also asked.Results indicated that individuals perceived personal risk to be lower than for either other people or society, independent of the hazard characteristics, in line with the theory of optimistic bias. Personal control tended to be seen as greater for the self than for other people, for those hazards where personal control was conceptually feasible. Perceived control for societal hazards was conferred onto society. Individuals thought that personal knowledge for a given hazard was greater than for other people. No direct relationship between perceived control and perceived risk was found, although there was a direct relationship between perceived knowledge and perceived control.The results are discussed within the framework of optimistic bias and illusion of control. It is concluded that the mechanism for such effects is dependent on the perceived characteristics of the potential hazard itself.Optimistic bias and greater perceived knowledge about potential hazards may explain the failure of public information campaigns; individuals will assume that they are invulnerable to hazards, and that information is directed at individuals less knowledgeable than themselves.