Hakes Jahn Karl, Viscusi W Kip
Clemson University, Department of Economics, Clemson, SC 29634-1309, USA.
Risk Anal. 2004 Jun;24(3):651-64. doi: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00465.x.
General patterns of bias in risk beliefs are well established in the literature, but much less is known about how these biases vary across the population. Using a sample of almost 500 people, the regression analysis in this article yields results consistent with the well-established pattern that small risks are overassessed and large risks are underassessed. The accuracy of these risk beliefs varies across demographic factors, as does the switch point at which people go from underassessment to overassessment, which we found to be 1500 deaths annually for the full sample. Better educated people have more accurate risk beliefs, and there are important differences in the risk perception by race and gender that also may be of policy interest.
风险认知偏差的一般模式在文献中已得到充分证实,但对于这些偏差在人群中的差异情况,我们所知甚少。本文以近500人为样本进行回归分析,得出的结果与已充分证实的模式一致,即小风险被高估,大风险被低估。这些风险认知的准确性因人口统计学因素而异,人们从低估转向高估的转折点也因人口统计学因素而不同,我们发现全样本的转折点是每年1500人死亡。受教育程度较高的人对风险的认知更准确,而且在种族和性别方面的风险认知也存在重要差异,这可能也具有政策意义。