Suppr超能文献

感知差距:当我们对风险产生错误认知时,识别和管理由此产生的风险。

The Perception Gap: Recognizing and managing the risks that arise when we get risk wrong.

机构信息

Harvard University, Cambridge, 21 Baker Avenue, Concord, MA 01742, United States.

出版信息

Food Chem Toxicol. 2012 May;50(5):1222-5. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2012.02.015. Epub 2012 Feb 21.

Abstract

Many in the academic, science, and business communities are frustrated at how people perceive and respond to risk, lamenting that the lay public is sometimes more afraid of some threats than the evidence warrants, and less afraid of some dangers than the evidence warns. This is often ascribed to the alarmist way the news media cover risk-related subjects. That criticism is simplistic and unproductive, and ignores or dismisses the large body of research that finds that the perception of risk is not, and can never be, perfectly rational. Risk perception among members of the public, the media, and members of the academic, scientific, and business communities, is ultimately subjective. The gap between our fears and the evidence is not simply the product of alarmist media reporting. This 'Perception Gap' poses significant risks in and of itself, influencing the choices we make as individuals and as a society. The roots of the Perception Gap must be understood if we are to recognize the dangers that can arise when we sometimes get risk wrong, and in order that we may more wisely manage those risks as actively as we manage toxicological or food or other risks with which we are more familiar.

摘要

许多学术界、科学界和商界人士对人们感知和应对风险的方式感到沮丧,他们感叹公众有时对某些威胁的恐惧超过了证据所证明的程度,而对某些危险的恐惧则低于证据所警告的程度。人们常将这种情况归咎于新闻媒体对与风险相关的主题的危言耸听的报道方式。这种批评过于简单化,没有成效,忽视或轻视了大量研究发现,即风险感知并非,也永远不可能是完全理性的。公众、媒体以及学术界、科学界和商界人士对风险的感知最终是主观的。我们的恐惧与证据之间的差距不仅仅是耸人听闻的媒体报道的产物。这种“感知差距”本身就存在着重大风险,影响着我们作为个人和整个社会所做的选择。如果我们要认识到当我们有时对风险的判断出现错误时可能会带来的危险,并且为了能够像管理我们更熟悉的毒理学或食品或其他风险一样积极地管理这些风险,就必须了解感知差距的根源。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验