Journals / Iğdır Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 8

Perceiving Risk Perception: An Analysis of Risk Perception Research and Discussion of Its Policy Implications

Risk Algısını Anlamak: Risk Algısı Çalışmalarının İncelenmesi ve Siyasi Sonuçlarının Tartışılması

Pages
21–41
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The principal contribution of this article is to propose risk perception as an efficient and politically relevant scientific field of research and encourage scientists and politicians to attach more importance to this field.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Turkey is a country of risks.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It is, however, astonishing that the risk perception literature has not been sufficiently integrated into Turkish social sciences.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The principal contribution of this article is to propose risk perception as an efficient and politically relevant scientific field of research and encourage scientists and politicians to attach more importance to this field.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Risk algısı · risk komünikasyonu · kamu politikaları

Abstract

Turkey is a country of risks. From terrorism to natural disasters, various risks surround the country and its people. It is, however, astonishing that the risk perception literature has not been sufficiently integrated into Turkish social sciences. This article realizes two main objectives. Firstly, it provides a comprehensive analytical review of the research on risk perception. Secondly, it discusses the political and administrative implications arising out of risk perception research and offers recommendations to government officials on public policy and risk communication. The principal contribution of this article is to propose risk perception as an efficient and politically relevant scientific field of research and encourage scientists and politicians to attach more importance to this field.

Özet

Türkiye bir riskler ülkesi. Terörizmden doğal afetlere, birçok risk ülkeyi ve insanlarını çevrelemekte. Ancak oldukça şaşırtıcıdır ki, risk algısı literatürü Türk sosyal bilimlerine yeterli ölçüde entegre olmamıştır. Bu makale iki temel amacı gerçekleştirmektedir. Öncelikle, risk algısı araştırmalarının kapsamlı ve analitik incelemesini sunar. İkinci olarak, risk algısı araştırmalarından çıkan siyasi ve idari sonuçları tartışarak, devlet yetkililerine kamu politikaları ve risk komünikasyonu hakkında öneriler getirir. Bu makalenin başlıca katkısı risk algısını verimli ve siyasi önem taşıyan bir bilimsel araştırma sahası olarak ileri sürmek ve bilim insanları ve siyasetçileri bu sahaya daha çok önem vermeye teşvik etmektir

🔖

Cite This Article

BAYRAM, A. B. (2022). Perceiving Risk Perception: An Analysis of Risk Perception Research and Discussion of Its Policy Implications. Iğdır Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 8, 21–41. https://ajindex.com/articles/539000

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Adams, John, Risk, London: UCL Press, 1995.
  2. Akan, Hulya, YesimGurol, Guldal Izbirak, Sukran Ozdatlı, Gulden Yil- maz, Ayca Vitrinel, and Osman Hayran, “Knowledge and Attitudes of University Students toward Pandemic Influenza: A Cross- Sectional Study from Turkey”, BMC Public Health 10 (1), 2010, p. 413- 421. Alhakami, Ali Siddiq and Paul Slovic, “A Psychological Study of the In- verse Relationship between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit”, Risk Analysis 14 (6), 1994, p. 1085-1096.
  3. Apaydin, Fahri and Mehmet Emir Köksal, “Turkish Consumers’ Risk Perception towards Global Computer Brands”, International Journal of Marketing Studies 3 (3), 2011, p.165-172.
  4. Aven, Terje, Ortwin Renn, and Eugene A. Rosa, “On the Ontological Status of the Concept of Risk”, Safety Science 49 (8), 2011, p.1074- 1079. Boholm, Asa, “Comparative Studies of Risk Perception: A Review of Twenty Years of Research”, Journal of Risk Research 1 (2), 1998, p. 135- 163. Ceber, Esin, Meral Turk Soyer, Meltem Ciceklioglu, and Sunduz Cimat, “Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Risk Perception on Nurses and Midwives in Bornova Health District in Turkey”, Cancer Nursing 29 (3), 2006, p. 244-249.
  5. Damasio, Antonio R., Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and Human Brain, New York: Avon Press, 1994.
  6. De Wit, John B.F., Enny Das, and Raymond Vet, “What Works Best: Objective Statistics or a Personal Testimonial? An Assessment of the Persuasive Effects of Different Types of Message Evidence on Risk Perception”, Health Psychology 27 (1), 2008, p. 110-115.
  7. Druckman, James N., “Political Preference Formation: Competition, Deliberation, and the (Ir)relevance of Framing Effects”, American Po- litical Science Review 98 (4), 2004, p. 671-686.
  8. Entman, Robert M., “Framing: Towards Clarification of a Fractured Para- digm”, Journal of Communication 43 (4), p. 51-58.
  9. Epstein, Seymour, “Integration of the Cognitive and the Psychodynamic Unconscious”, American Psychologist 49 (8), 1994, p.709-724.
  10. Fischhoff, Baruch, Paul Slovic, Sarah Lichtenstein, Stephen Read, and Barbara Combs, “How Safe is Safe Enough? A Psychometric Study of Attitudes towards Technological Risks and Benefits”, Policy Sciences 9 (2), 1978, p. 127-152.
  11. Folkes, Valerie S., “The Availability Heuristic and Perceived Risk”, Jour- nal of Consumer Research 15 (1), 1988, p. 13-23
  12. Hablemitoglu, Sengul, and Filiz Yildirim, “The Relationship between Perception of Risk and Decision Making Styles of Turkish Universi- ty Students: A Descriptive Study of Individual