Risk perception mechanisms - Revision history

Florian at 13:11, 11 June 2013

2013-06-11T13:11:17Z

Florian at 10:06, 11 June 2013

2013-06-11T10:06:22Z

Florian at 23:23, 4 February 2013

2013-02-04T23:23:57Z

Florian at 22:34, 4 February 2013

2013-02-04T22:34:31Z

Florian at 20:48, 4 February 2013

2013-02-04T20:48:02Z

Florian at 20:43, 4 February 2013

2013-02-04T20:43:38Z

Florian at 20:42, 4 February 2013

2013-02-04T20:42:09Z

Albert at 16:35, 30 January 2013

2013-01-30T16:35:55Z

Albert: Text replace - "= MAP =" to ""

2013-01-30T16:31:08Z

Text replace - "= MAP =" to ""

Albert: Text replace - " ={{PAGENAME}}=" to ""

2013-01-30T15:08:45Z

Text replace - " ={{PAGENAME}}=" to ""

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 ==Factors affecting human risk perception==
-Factors that affect citizens perception of risk are variable and complex.<ref>Cf. World Health Organization (WHO): Effective Media Communication during Public Health Emergencies. A WHO Handbook. Geneva. World Health Organization, 2005, p. 110-111. Online: http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO%20MEDIA%20HANDBOOK.pdf; H. Sterr et al.: Risikomanagement im Küstenschutz in Norddeutschland. In: C. Felgentreff/T. Glade: Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, pp. 345-346;  M. Zwick/O. Renn: Risikokonzepte jenseits von Eintrittswahrscheinlichkeit und Schadenserwartung. In: C. Felgentreff/T. Glade: Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, pp. 85-95; D. Proske: Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. 1. Auflage. Eigenverlag: Dresden, 2004, pp. 167-174. Online: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.;  OECD: OECD Reviews of Risk Management Policies. Future Global Shocks. Improving Risk Governance. Preliminary Version. OECD Publishing, 2011, pp. 54-56. Online: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/24/36/48256382.pdf.; V.T. Covello et al.: Risk Communication, the West Nile Virus Epidemic, and Bioterrorism: Responding to the Communication Challenges Posed by the Intentional or Unintentional Release of a Pathogen in an Urban Setting. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, Volume 78, No. 2, 2001, pp. 382-391.; P. Slovic et al.: Facts and Fears: Societal Perception of Risk. In: K. B. Monroe/A. Abor (eds): Advances In Consumer Research, Volume 08, Association For Consumer Research, 1981, pp. 497-502. Online: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/display.asp?id=5844.</ref> Risk research, independent of the subject matter in question, sees citizens’ assessment of risks and threats considerably dependent on knowledge of precedents, frequency and extent of risk experience as well as perceived immediate effects on themselves.<ref>D. Proske: Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. 1. Auflage. Eigenverlag: Dresden, 2004, Online: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.</ref>
+Factors that affect citizens perception of risk are variable and complex.<ref>Cf. World Health Organization (WHO): Effective Media Communication during Public Health Emergencies. A WHO Handbook. Geneva: WHO Publication Service, 2005 110-111. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO%20MEDIA%20HANDBOOK.pdf; Sterr H. et al.: Risikomanagement im Küstenschutz in Norddeutschland, in: Felgentreff C., Glade T.: Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, 345-346; Zwick M.,  Renn O.: Risikokonzepte jenseits von Eintrittswahrscheinlichkeit und Schadenserwartung, in: Felgentreff C., Glade T. : Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, 85-95; Proske D. : Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. Eigenverlag: Dresden, 2004, 167-174. Retrieved from: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): OECD Reviews of Risk Management Policies. Future Global Shocks. Improving Risk Governance. Preliminary Version. OECD Publication Service, 2001, 54-56. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/24/36/48256382.pdf.; Covello V. T.et al.: Risk Communication, the West Nile Virus Epidemic, and Bioterrorism: Responding to the Communication Challenges Posed by the Intentional or Unintentional Release of a Pathogen in an Urban Setting. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, vol. 78, no. 2, 2001, 382-391; Slovic P. et al.: Facts and Fears – Societal Perception of Risk, in: K. B. Monroe K.B., Abor A. (eds.): Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 08, Association for Consumer Research, 1981, 497-502. Retrieved from: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/display.asp?id=5844.</ref> Risk research, independent of the subject matter in question, sees citizens’ assessment of risks and threats considerably dependent on knowledge of precedents, frequency and extent of risk experience as well as perceived immediate effects on themselves.<ref>Proske D.: Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. Dresden: Eigenverlag, 2004.Retrieved from: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.</ref>
 The following listing summarises factors that affect citizens perception of risk and felt need for public authorities to address risk:

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 [[Category:Threat]]
 [[File:ae.png|25px|right|This is a page providing background in a specific field of expertise]]
-'''Risk perception mechanisms''' lay behind the fact that subjective [[Perception of (in)security|risk perception]] deviates from objective risks. What people perceive, is real for them; so their behaviour will be influenced not by the actual level of security, but of their perception of it. Citizens always assess [[risk|risks]], [[threat|threats]] and uncertainties on a subjective and individual basis. To a certain extent, gaps between ''felt and factual risks/security'' are normal phenomena.
+'''Risk perception mechanisms''' lay behind the fact that subjective [[Perception of (in)security|risk perception]] deviates from objective risks. What people perceive is real for them; so their behaviour will be influenced not by the actual level of security but of their perception of it. Citizens always assess [[risk|risks]], [[threat|threats]] and uncertainties on a subjective and individual basis. To a certain extent, gaps between ''felt and factual risks/security'' are normal phenomena.
-==Factors affecting human risk percpetion==
+==Factors affecting human risk perception==
-Factors that affect citizens' perception of risk are variable and complex.<ref>Cf. World Health Organization (WHO): Effective Media Communication during Public Health Emergencies. A WHO Handbook. Geneva. World Health Organization, 2005, p. 110-111. Online: http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO%20MEDIA%20HANDBOOK.pdf; H. Sterr et al.: Risikomanagement im Küstenschutz in Norddeutschland. In: C. Felgentreff/T. Glade: Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, pp. 345-346;  M. Zwick/O. Renn: Risikokonzepte jenseits von Eintrittswahrscheinlichkeit und Schadenserwartung. In: C. Felgentreff/T. Glade: Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, pp. 85-95; D. Proske: Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. 1. Auflage. Eigenverlag: Dresden, 2004, pp. 167-174. Online: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.;  OECD: OECD Reviews of Risk Management Policies. Future Global Shocks. Improving Risk Governance. Preliminary Version. OECD Publishing, 2011, pp. 54-56. Online: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/24/36/48256382.pdf.; V.T. Covello et al.: Risk Communication, the West Nile Virus Epidemic, and Bioterrorism: Responding to the Communication Challenges Posed by the Intentional or Unintentional Release of a Pathogen in an Urban Setting. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, Volume 78, No. 2, 2001, pp. 382-391.; P. Slovic et al.: Facts and Fears: Societal Perception of Risk. In: K. B. Monroe/A. Abor (eds): Advances In Consumer Research, Volume 08, Association For Consumer Research, 1981, pp. 497-502. Online: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/display.asp?id=5844.</ref> Risk research, independent of the subject matter in question, sees citizens’ assessment of risks and threats considerably dependent on knowledge of precedents, frequency and extent of risk experience as well as perceived immediate effects on themselves.<ref>D. Proske: Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. 1. Auflage. Eigenverlag: Dresden, 2004, Online: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.</ref>
+Factors that affect citizens perception of risk are variable and complex.<ref>Cf. World Health Organization (WHO): Effective Media Communication during Public Health Emergencies. A WHO Handbook. Geneva. World Health Organization, 2005, p. 110-111. Online: http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO%20MEDIA%20HANDBOOK.pdf; H. Sterr et al.: Risikomanagement im Küstenschutz in Norddeutschland. In: C. Felgentreff/T. Glade: Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, pp. 345-346;  M. Zwick/O. Renn: Risikokonzepte jenseits von Eintrittswahrscheinlichkeit und Schadenserwartung. In: C. Felgentreff/T. Glade: Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, pp. 85-95; D. Proske: Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. 1. Auflage. Eigenverlag: Dresden, 2004, pp. 167-174. Online: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.;  OECD: OECD Reviews of Risk Management Policies. Future Global Shocks. Improving Risk Governance. Preliminary Version. OECD Publishing, 2011, pp. 54-56. Online: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/24/36/48256382.pdf.; V.T. Covello et al.: Risk Communication, the West Nile Virus Epidemic, and Bioterrorism: Responding to the Communication Challenges Posed by the Intentional or Unintentional Release of a Pathogen in an Urban Setting. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, Volume 78, No. 2, 2001, pp. 382-391.; P. Slovic et al.: Facts and Fears: Societal Perception of Risk. In: K. B. Monroe/A. Abor (eds): Advances In Consumer Research, Volume 08, Association For Consumer Research, 1981, pp. 497-502. Online: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/display.asp?id=5844.</ref> Risk research, independent of the subject matter in question, sees citizens’ assessment of risks and threats considerably dependent on knowledge of precedents, frequency and extent of risk experience as well as perceived immediate effects on themselves.<ref>D. Proske: Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. 1. Auflage. Eigenverlag: Dresden, 2004, Online: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.</ref>
-The following listing summarizes factors that affect citizens' perception of risk and felt need for public authorities to address risk:
+The following listing summarises factors that affect citizens perception of risk and felt need for public authorities to address risk:
-* '''Voluntariness''': Risks from activities considered to be involuntary or imposed (for example, exposure to chemicals and radiation from a terrorist attack using chemical weapons or dirty bombs) are judged to be greater, and are therefore less readily accepted, than risks from voluntary activities (such as smoking, sunbathing or mountain climbing).
+* '''Voluntariness''': Risks from activities considered to be involuntary or imposed (for example, exposure to chemicals and radiation from a terrorist attack using chemical weapons or dirty bombs) are judged to be greater, and are therefore less readily accepted than risks from voluntary activities (such as smoking, sunbathing or mountain climbing).
 * '''Controllability''': Risks from activities considered to be under the control of others (such as the release of nerve gas in a coordinated series of terrorist attacks) are judged to be greater, and are less readily accepted than those from activities considered to be under the control of the individual (such as driving an automobile or riding a bicycle).
 * '''Familiarity''': Risks resulting from activities viewed as unfamiliar (such as travel leading to exposure to exotic-sounding infectious diseases) are judged greater than risks resulting from activities viewed as familiar (such as household work).
@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 * '''Victim identity''': Risks from activities that produce identifiable victims (such as an individual worker exposed to high levels of toxic chemicals or radiation, or a child who falls down a well) are judged to be greater than risks from activities that produce statistical victim profiles (such as automobile accidents).
 * '''Dread''': Risks from activities that evoke fear, terror or anxiety due to the horrific consequences of exposure (for example to HIV, radiation sickness, cancer, Ebola or smallpox) are judged to be greater than risks from activities that do not arouse such feelings or emotions regarding exposure (for example to common colds or household accidents).
-* '''Trust''': Risks from activities associated with individuals, institutions or organizations lacking in trust and credibility (for example, chemical companies or nuclear power plants with poor safety records) are judged to be greater than risks from activities associated with trustworthy and credible sources (for example, regulatory agencies that achieve high levels of compliance from regulated industries).
+* '''Trust''': Risks from activities associated with individuals, institutions or organisations lacking in trust and credibility (for example, chemical companies or nuclear power plants with poor safety records) are judged to be greater than risks from activities associated with trustworthy and credible sources (for example, regulatory agencies that achieve high levels of compliance from regulated industries).
 * '''Ethical and moral status''': Risks from activities believed to be ethically objectionable or morally wrong (such as providing diluted or outdated vaccines for an economically distressed community) are judged to be greater than the risks from ethically neutral activities (such as the side-effects of medication).
 * '''Catastrophic potential''': Risks from activities associated with potentially high numbers of deaths and injuries grouped in time and space (for example, major terrorist attacks using biological, chemical or nuclear weapons) are judged to be greater than risks from activities that cause deaths and injuries scattered (often apparently randomly) in time and space (for example, household accidents).
@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 ==Relevance for security-related urban planning==
-The general mechanisms of human risk perception summarized above can for example help indentify urban objects that citizens perceive as insecure and/or under high risk. Apart from physical security of urban environment, urban planning needs to be aware of and address citizens' [[perception of (in)security and risks]].
+The general mechanisms of human risk perception summarised above can, for example, help indentify urban objects that citizens perceive as insecure and/or under high risk. Apart from physical security of urban environment, urban planning needs to be aware of and address citizens [[perception of (in)security and risks]].
 {{references}}

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 [[Category:Social]]
 [[Category:Threat]]
+[[File:ae.png|25px|right|This is a page providing background in a specific field of expertise]]
 '''Risk perception mechanisms''' lay behind the fact that subjective [[Perception of (in)security|risk perception]] deviates from objective risks. What people perceive, is real for them; so their behaviour will be influenced not by the actual level of security, but of their perception of it. Citizens always assess [[risk|risks]], [[threat|threats]] and uncertainties on a subjective and individual basis. To a certain extent, gaps between ''felt and factual risks/security'' are normal phenomena.

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 * '''Reversibility''': The risks of potentially irreversible adverse effects (such as birth defects from exposure to a toxic substance or radiation) are judged to be greater than risks considered to be reversible (for example, sports injuries).
 * '''Personal stake''': Activities viewed as placing people or their families personally and directly at risk (such as living near a waste-disposal site) are judged to carry greater risks than activities that appear to pose no direct or personal threat (such as the disposal of waste in remote areas).
-* '''Human versus natural origin''': Risks generated by human action, failure or incompetence (such as negligence, inadequate safeguards or operator error) are judged to be greater than risks believed to be caused by nature or “acts of god” (such as exposure to geological radon or cosmic rays).”
+* '''Human versus natural origin''': Risks generated by human action, failure or incompetence (such as negligence, inadequate safeguards or operator error) are judged to be greater than risks believed to be caused by nature or “acts of god” (such as exposure to geological radon or cosmic rays).
+==Relevance for security-related urban planning==
+The general mechanisms of human risk perception summarized above can for example help indentify urban objects that citizens perceive as insecure and/or under high risk. Apart from physical security of urban environment, urban planning needs to be aware of and address citizens' [[perception of (in)security and risks]].
 {{references}}

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 '''Risk perception mechanisms''' lay behind the fact that subjective [[Perception of (in)security|risk perception]] deviates from objective risks. What people perceive, is real for them; so their behaviour will be influenced not by the actual level of security, but of their perception of it. Citizens always assess [[risk|risks]], [[threat|threats]] and uncertainties on a subjective and individual basis. To a certain extent, gaps between ''felt and factual risks/security'' are normal phenomena.
-==Factors affecting individual and social perception of risks==
+==Factors affecting human risk percpetion==
-Factors that affect citizens' perception of risk are variable and complex.<ref>Cf. H. Sterr et al.: Risikomanagement im Küstenschutz in Norddeutschland. In: C. Felgentreff/T. Glade: Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, pp. 345-346;  M. Zwick/O. Renn: Risikokonzepte jenseits von Eintrittswahrscheinlichkeit und Schadenserwartung. In: C. Felgentreff/T. Glade: Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, pp. 85-95; D. Proske: Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. 1. Auflage. Eigenverlag: Dresden, 2004, pp. 167-174. Online: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.;  OECD: OECD Reviews of Risk Management Policies. Future Global Shocks. Improving Risk Governance. Preliminary Version. OECD Publishing, 2011, pp. 54-56. Online: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/24/36/48256382.pdf.; V.T. Covello et al.: Risk Communication, the West Nile Virus Epidemic, and Bioterrorism: Responding to the Communication Challenges Posed by the Intentional or Unintentional Release of a Pathogen in an Urban Setting. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, Volume 78, No. 2, 2001, pp. 382-391.; P. Slovic et al.: Facts and Fears: Societal Perception of Risk. In: K. B. Monroe/A. Abor (eds): Advances In Consumer Research, Volume 08, Association For Consumer Research, 1981, pp. 497-502. Online: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/display.asp?id=5844.</ref> Risk research, independent of the subject matter in question, sees citizens’ assessment of risks and threats considerably dependent on knowledge of precedents, frequency and extent of risk experience as well as perceived immediate effects on themselves.<ref>D. Proske: Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. 1. Auflage. Eigenverlag: Dresden, 2004, Online: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.</ref>
+Factors that affect citizens' perception of risk are variable and complex.<ref>Cf. World Health Organization (WHO): Effective Media Communication during Public Health Emergencies. A WHO Handbook. Geneva. World Health Organization, 2005, p. 110-111. Online: http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO%20MEDIA%20HANDBOOK.pdf; H. Sterr et al.: Risikomanagement im Küstenschutz in Norddeutschland. In: C. Felgentreff/T. Glade: Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, pp. 345-346;  M. Zwick/O. Renn: Risikokonzepte jenseits von Eintrittswahrscheinlichkeit und Schadenserwartung. In: C. Felgentreff/T. Glade: Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2008, pp. 85-95; D. Proske: Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. 1. Auflage. Eigenverlag: Dresden, 2004, pp. 167-174. Online: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.;  OECD: OECD Reviews of Risk Management Policies. Future Global Shocks. Improving Risk Governance. Preliminary Version. OECD Publishing, 2011, pp. 54-56. Online: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/24/36/48256382.pdf.; V.T. Covello et al.: Risk Communication, the West Nile Virus Epidemic, and Bioterrorism: Responding to the Communication Challenges Posed by the Intentional or Unintentional Release of a Pathogen in an Urban Setting. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, Volume 78, No. 2, 2001, pp. 382-391.; P. Slovic et al.: Facts and Fears: Societal Perception of Risk. In: K. B. Monroe/A. Abor (eds): Advances In Consumer Research, Volume 08, Association For Consumer Research, 1981, pp. 497-502. Online: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/display.asp?id=5844.</ref> Risk research, independent of the subject matter in question, sees citizens’ assessment of risks and threats considerably dependent on knowledge of precedents, frequency and extent of risk experience as well as perceived immediate effects on themselves.<ref>D. Proske: Katalog Risiken. Risiken und ihre Darstellung. 1. Auflage. Eigenverlag: Dresden, 2004, Online: http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/71/1218786958574-1736.pdf.</ref>
+The following listing summarizes factors that affect citizens' perception of risk and felt need for public authorities to address risk:
-===Fear-related factors===
-*Risks causing pain and death are generally feared (e.g. shark attack vs. heart attack);
-*Controllable risks tend to be feared less than uncontrollable risks (such as air trips, urban criminality, terrorism, food contamination);
-*Disasters with global impacts are feared more than those with regional impacts (nuclear war vs. conventional war);
-*Lethal risks are feared more (air crashes vs. car accidents);
-*Risks equal to all population groups are feared less than risks effecting particular sub-groups (especially children);
-*Collective risks are feared more than individual risks;
-*Risks exceeding life spans are more alarming;
-*Risks that are hard to prevent cause greater fear;
-*Decreasing risks (e.g. due to mitigation) are feared less;
-*Involuntary risks are feared more;
-*Direct affection (e.g. 9/11) raises fear of risk;
-*Avoidable risks cause less fear (e.g. due to medical progress such as AIDS)
-===Knowledge related factors===
-*Invisible Risks (smoke vs. genetic engineering);
-*Risks with unknown degree of exposure;
-*Risks having delayed effects;
-*New/unknown risks;
-*Scientifically implausible risks.
-===Internal/emotional factors<ref>World Health Organization (WHO): Effective Media Communication during Public Health Emergencies. A WHO Handbook. Geneva. World Health Organization, 2005, p. 110-111. Online: http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO%20MEDIA%20HANDBOOK.pdf; Security research project results from CPSI. Online: http://www.cpsi-fp7.eu; KIRAS project SFI@SFU work. Online: http://www.sfi-sfu.eu</ref>===
 * '''Voluntariness''': Risks from activities considered to be involuntary or imposed (for example, exposure to chemicals and radiation from a terrorist attack using chemical weapons or dirty bombs) are judged to be greater, and are therefore less readily accepted, than risks from voluntary activities (such as smoking, sunbathing or mountain climbing).
@@ Line 42: / Line 21: @@
 * '''Trust''': Risks from activities associated with individuals, institutions or organizations lacking in trust and credibility (for example, chemical companies or nuclear power plants with poor safety records) are judged to be greater than risks from activities associated with trustworthy and credible sources (for example, regulatory agencies that achieve high levels of compliance from regulated industries).
 * '''Ethical and moral status''': Risks from activities believed to be ethically objectionable or morally wrong (such as providing diluted or outdated vaccines for an economically distressed community) are judged to be greater than the risks from ethically neutral activities (such as the side-effects of medication).
-===External factors===
 * '''Catastrophic potential''': Risks from activities associated with potentially high numbers of deaths and injuries grouped in time and space (for example, major terrorist attacks using biological, chemical or nuclear weapons) are judged to be greater than risks from activities that cause deaths and injuries scattered (often apparently randomly) in time and space (for example, household accidents).
 * '''Media attention''': Risks from activities that generate considerable media attention (such as anthrax attacks using the postal system or accidents at nuclear power plants) are judged to be greater than risks from activities that generate little media attention (such as occupational accidents).

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 [[Category:Social]]
 [[Category:Threat]]
 '''Risk perception mechanisms''' lay behind the fact that subjective [[Perception of (in)security|risk perception]] deviates from objective risks. What people perceive, is real for them; so their behaviour will be influenced not by the actual level of security, but of their perception of it. Citizens always assess [[risk|risks]], [[threat|threats]] and uncertainties on a subjective and individual basis. To a certain extent, gaps between '''felt and factual risks/security''' are normal phenomena.
@@ Line 54: / Line 53: @@
 {{references}}
-<websiteFrame>
-website=http://securipedia.eu/cool/index.php?wiki=securipedia.eu&concept=Risk perception mechanisms
-height=1023
-width=100%
-border=0
-scroll=auto
-align=middle
-</websiteFrame>
-<headertabs/>