Lee T R
Sci Total Environ. 1986 May;51:125-47. doi: 10.1016/0048-9697(86)90296-2.
Public concern over chemical hazards is increasing in a context where overall life expectancy has rapidly improved. However, people's expectations of safety continue to exceed the presently attained levels and a mistrust of technological expertise is pervasive. Paradoxically this may arise because the ordinary person has assimilated scientific notions of causality that partially replace religious or magical explanations for accidents and catastrophes. The public's perceptions of risk frequently diverge considerably (in either direction) from the probabilistic risk assessments made by engineers and scientists. Both assessments are usually wrong: reconciliation rather than confrontations should be sought. The public is not 'irrational', it has different reasons and values. A brief view is given of the methodology and main findings of research on perceived risk, both comparative approaches and those where perceptions of a single hazard are explored in detail. Illustrative studies of community attitudes to pesticides, chemical food additives and of people's beliefs about nuclear power are outlined.
在总体预期寿命迅速提高的背景下,公众对化学危害的关注度日益增加。然而,人们对安全的期望仍继续超过目前已达到的水平,并且对技术专长的不信任普遍存在。矛盾的是,这可能是因为普通人吸收了因果关系的科学概念,这些概念部分取代了对事故和灾难的宗教或魔法解释。公众对风险的认知往往与工程师和科学家进行的概率风险评估有很大差异(朝任何一个方向)。两种评估通常都是错误的:应该寻求和解而非对抗。公众并非“不理性”,他们有不同的理由和价值观。本文简要介绍了关于感知风险研究的方法和主要发现,包括比较方法以及详细探究对单一危害的认知的方法。概述了关于社区对农药、化学食品添加剂的态度以及人们对核电的看法的实例研究。