Risk Perception in a Developing Country: The Case of Chile

Nicolás C. Bronfman, Luis A. Cifuentes

Resultado de la investigación: Article

89 Citas (Scopus)

Resumen

In this work we characterize risk perception in Chile, based on the psychometric paradigm, exploring the difference between perceived social and personal risk. For this purpose, we conducted a survey including 54 hazards, 16 risk attributes, and 3 risk constructs. The survey, divided into four parts, was administered to 508 residents of Santiago, Chile. Using factor analysis, three main factors, which accounted for 80% of the sample's variance, were identified: factor 1, commonly called "Dread Risk" in the literature, explained 37% of variance; factor 2, "Unknown Risk," explained 28%; and factor 3, which we called "Personal Effect," explained 15% of the variance. On average, individuals perceived themselves as less exposed to risk and with more control and knowledge about them than the general population. OLS regression models were used to test the association of perceived risk with the three main factors. For social risk, factor 1 had the greatest explanatory power, while factor 2 had a negative sign. For personal risk, only factors 2 and 3 were significant, with factor 3 having the greatest explanatory power. Risk denial (defined as the difference between perceived personal and social risk) was associated with factors 1 and 2 only, with factor 2 having a negative sign. The difference between desired and actual regulation levels proved positive for all hazards, thus indicating that Chileans are dissatisfied with the current regulation level for all the hazards analyzed. The comparison of data at the aggregate and at the individual subject's level suggests that while the aggregate analysis overestimates the magnitude of the correlations it still reflects the tendency of the individual responses.

Idioma originalEnglish
Páginas (desde-hasta)1271-1285
Número de páginas15
PublicaciónRisk Analysis
Volumen23
N.º6
DOI
EstadoPublished - dic 2003

Huella dactilar

Risk perception
Chile
Developing countries
Developing Countries
developing country
Hazards
great power
regulation
Factor analysis
Psychometrics
psychometrics
Statistical Factor Analysis
factor analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality
  • Physiology (medical)

Citar esto

Bronfman, Nicolás C. ; Cifuentes, Luis A. / Risk Perception in a Developing Country : The Case of Chile. En: Risk Analysis. 2003 ; Vol. 23, N.º 6. pp. 1271-1285.
@article{8ad7c6b81b6d48a28e675507d6ac82a7,
title = "Risk Perception in a Developing Country: The Case of Chile",
abstract = "In this work we characterize risk perception in Chile, based on the psychometric paradigm, exploring the difference between perceived social and personal risk. For this purpose, we conducted a survey including 54 hazards, 16 risk attributes, and 3 risk constructs. The survey, divided into four parts, was administered to 508 residents of Santiago, Chile. Using factor analysis, three main factors, which accounted for 80{\%} of the sample's variance, were identified: factor 1, commonly called {"}Dread Risk{"} in the literature, explained 37{\%} of variance; factor 2, {"}Unknown Risk,{"} explained 28{\%}; and factor 3, which we called {"}Personal Effect,{"} explained 15{\%} of the variance. On average, individuals perceived themselves as less exposed to risk and with more control and knowledge about them than the general population. OLS regression models were used to test the association of perceived risk with the three main factors. For social risk, factor 1 had the greatest explanatory power, while factor 2 had a negative sign. For personal risk, only factors 2 and 3 were significant, with factor 3 having the greatest explanatory power. Risk denial (defined as the difference between perceived personal and social risk) was associated with factors 1 and 2 only, with factor 2 having a negative sign. The difference between desired and actual regulation levels proved positive for all hazards, thus indicating that Chileans are dissatisfied with the current regulation level for all the hazards analyzed. The comparison of data at the aggregate and at the individual subject's level suggests that while the aggregate analysis overestimates the magnitude of the correlations it still reflects the tendency of the individual responses.",
keywords = "Developing countries, Environmental risks, Psychometric paradigm, Risk perception",
author = "Bronfman, {Nicol{\'a}s C.} and Cifuentes, {Luis A.}",
year = "2003",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1111/j.0272-4332.2003.00400.x",
language = "English",
volume = "23",
pages = "1271--1285",
journal = "Risk Analysis",
issn = "0272-4332",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "6",

}

Risk Perception in a Developing Country : The Case of Chile. / Bronfman, Nicolás C.; Cifuentes, Luis A.

En: Risk Analysis, Vol. 23, N.º 6, 12.2003, p. 1271-1285.

Resultado de la investigación: Article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risk Perception in a Developing Country

T2 - The Case of Chile

AU - Bronfman, Nicolás C.

AU - Cifuentes, Luis A.

PY - 2003/12

Y1 - 2003/12

N2 - In this work we characterize risk perception in Chile, based on the psychometric paradigm, exploring the difference between perceived social and personal risk. For this purpose, we conducted a survey including 54 hazards, 16 risk attributes, and 3 risk constructs. The survey, divided into four parts, was administered to 508 residents of Santiago, Chile. Using factor analysis, three main factors, which accounted for 80% of the sample's variance, were identified: factor 1, commonly called "Dread Risk" in the literature, explained 37% of variance; factor 2, "Unknown Risk," explained 28%; and factor 3, which we called "Personal Effect," explained 15% of the variance. On average, individuals perceived themselves as less exposed to risk and with more control and knowledge about them than the general population. OLS regression models were used to test the association of perceived risk with the three main factors. For social risk, factor 1 had the greatest explanatory power, while factor 2 had a negative sign. For personal risk, only factors 2 and 3 were significant, with factor 3 having the greatest explanatory power. Risk denial (defined as the difference between perceived personal and social risk) was associated with factors 1 and 2 only, with factor 2 having a negative sign. The difference between desired and actual regulation levels proved positive for all hazards, thus indicating that Chileans are dissatisfied with the current regulation level for all the hazards analyzed. The comparison of data at the aggregate and at the individual subject's level suggests that while the aggregate analysis overestimates the magnitude of the correlations it still reflects the tendency of the individual responses.

AB - In this work we characterize risk perception in Chile, based on the psychometric paradigm, exploring the difference between perceived social and personal risk. For this purpose, we conducted a survey including 54 hazards, 16 risk attributes, and 3 risk constructs. The survey, divided into four parts, was administered to 508 residents of Santiago, Chile. Using factor analysis, three main factors, which accounted for 80% of the sample's variance, were identified: factor 1, commonly called "Dread Risk" in the literature, explained 37% of variance; factor 2, "Unknown Risk," explained 28%; and factor 3, which we called "Personal Effect," explained 15% of the variance. On average, individuals perceived themselves as less exposed to risk and with more control and knowledge about them than the general population. OLS regression models were used to test the association of perceived risk with the three main factors. For social risk, factor 1 had the greatest explanatory power, while factor 2 had a negative sign. For personal risk, only factors 2 and 3 were significant, with factor 3 having the greatest explanatory power. Risk denial (defined as the difference between perceived personal and social risk) was associated with factors 1 and 2 only, with factor 2 having a negative sign. The difference between desired and actual regulation levels proved positive for all hazards, thus indicating that Chileans are dissatisfied with the current regulation level for all the hazards analyzed. The comparison of data at the aggregate and at the individual subject's level suggests that while the aggregate analysis overestimates the magnitude of the correlations it still reflects the tendency of the individual responses.

KW - Developing countries

KW - Environmental risks

KW - Psychometric paradigm

KW - Risk perception

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0346422413&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2003.00400.x

DO - 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2003.00400.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 14641900

AN - SCOPUS:0346422413

VL - 23

SP - 1271

EP - 1285

JO - Risk Analysis

JF - Risk Analysis

SN - 0272-4332

IS - 6

ER -