Browsing by Author "Burns, William J."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Open Access
Incorporating structural models into research on the social amplification of risk : implications for theory construction and decision making
(1993) Burns, William J.; Slovic, Paul; Kasperson, Roger E.; Kasperson, Jeanne X.; Renn, Ortwin; Emani, Srinivas
A comprehensive approach to managing risk must draw on both the descriptive insights of the behavioral sciences and the prescriptive clarity of the management sciences. On the descriptive side, this study develops structural models to explain how the impact upon society of an accident or other unfortunate event is influenced by the physical consequences of the event, perceived risk, media coverage, and public response. Our findings indicate that the media and public response play crucial roles in determining the impact of an unfortunate event. Public response appears to be determined by perceptions that the event was caused by managerial incompetence and is a signal of future risk. On the prescriptive side, we briefly discuss how these findings based upon structural models can be incorporated into a decision-analytic procedure known as an influence diagram.
Open Access
The social amplification of risk : theoretical foundations and empirical applications
(1992) Renn, Ortwin; Burns, William J.; Kasperson, Jeanne X.; Kasperson, Roger E.; Slovic, Paul
The article presents the framework of social amplification of risk which integrates the technical assessment and the social experience of risk. Risk perception research has revealed that contextual factors shape individual risk estimations and evaluations. Identification of these factors, such as voluntariness, personal ability to influence risks, familiarity with the hazard, and catastrophic potential, provides useful information about the elements that individuals consider in constructing their interpretation of risks. In addition, analyses of people's heuristics in making inferences have shed some light on how risk information is generalized and evaluated intuitively. These psychological studies fail to explain, however, why individuals attend to certain characteristics of risks and ignore others. Furthermore, in focusing only on the individual as an information processor, these studies exclude from the analysis the social and cultural variance of risk interpretations. The social amplification framework postulates that the social and economic impacts of an adverse event are determined not only by the direct physical consequences of the event, but by the interaction of psychological, cultural, social, and institutional processes that amplify or attenuate public experience of risk and result in secondary impacts.