Search results

29 pages ; Risk management has become increasingly politicized and contentious. Polarized views, controversy, and overt conflict have become pervasive. Risk-perception research has recently begun to provide a new perspective on this problem. Distrust in risk analysis and risk management plays a central role in this perspective. According to this view, the conflicts and controversies surrounding risk management are not due to public ignorance or irrationality but, instead, are seen as a side effect of our remarkable form of participatory democracy, amplified by powerful technological and social changes that systematically destroy trust. Recognizing the importance of trust and understanding the "dynamics of the system" that destroys trust has vast implications for how we approach risk management in the future.

This paper uses regression techniques to take a second look at a classic risk‐perception data set originally collected by Paul Slovic, Sarah Lichtenstein, and Baruch Fischhoff. As discussed in earlier studies, the attributes expected mortality, effects on future generations, immediacy, and catastrophic potential all significantly affect risk ratings. However, we find that perceived risk and dread show different regression patterns; most importantly, only perceived risk ratings correlate with expected mortality. In addition, average risk ratings are found to be significantly affected by perceived individual benefits, which suggests that perceptions of risk are net rather than gross indicators of harm.

Risk management has become increasingly politicized and contentious. Polarized views, controversy, and overt conflict have become pervasive. Risk‐perception research has recently begun to provide a new perspective on this problem. Distrust in risk analysis and risk management plays a central role in this perspective. According to this view, the conflicts and controversies surrounding risk management are not due to public ignorance or irrationality but, instead, are seen as a side effect of our remarkable form of participatory democracy, amplified by powerful technological and social changes that systematically destroy trust. Recognizing the importance of trust and understanding the "dynamics of the system" that destroys trust has vast implications for how we approach risk management in the future.

Risk plays a central role in decision making. Accordingly, risk has been a popular research topic for more than four decades. Finding a generic definition of risk is hard, since this term is used in many areas such as economics, political science, management science, and medical research. However, one thing in common is that risk is always related to both the negative outcomes and uncertainty. In addition, we know that risk is normally subjective and constructed by a human's perception process. But indeed how do people perceive risks? Is there any model capable of describing this procedure and predicting people's perceived risk? In this article, we focus on empirical studies of perceived risk.

Studies have found that product intangibility increases consumers' perception of risk. However, most of these studies measured the intangibility and perceived risk constructs unidimensionally. The primary objective of this article is to examine the effects of the multiple dimensions of intangibility on the various types of risk. An empirical investigation revealed that, of the three intangibility dimensions, physical intangibility was the least correlated to the consumers' perception of risk in most situations, whereas mental intangibility and generality had a great impact on most dimensions of perceived risk. However, there were variations in the strength of the relationships between the intangibility dimensions and the risk dimensions when contrasting goods and services, generic products and brands, and online and offline purchase contexts. Theoretical and practical contributions to the service marketing literature are discussed.