
This research proposes and implements a new approach to the elicitation and analysis of perceptions of risk. We use best worst scaling (BWS) to elicit the levels of control respondents believe they have over risks and the level of concern those risks prompt. The approach seeks perceptions of control and concern over a large risk set and the elicitation method is structured so as to reduce the cognitive burden typically associated with ranking over large sets. The BWS approach is designed to yield strong discrimination over items. Further, the approach permits derivation of individual‐level values, in this case of perceptions of control and worry, and analysis of how these vary over observable characteristics, through estimation of random parameter logit models. The approach is implemented for a set of 20 food and nonfood risks. The results show considerable heterogeneity in perceptions of control and worry, that the degree of heterogeneity varies across the risks, and that women systematically consider themselves to have less control over the risks than men.
Adult, Male, Risk, Rural Population, 330, Urban Population, Food Contamination, Risk Assessment, risk perception, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, Probability, Middle Aged, United Kingdom, food pathogens, Logistic Models, Public Opinion, Food Microbiology, Female, Perception, heterogeneity, novel technology, Best-worst scaling
Adult, Male, Risk, Rural Population, 330, Urban Population, Food Contamination, Risk Assessment, risk perception, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, Probability, Middle Aged, United Kingdom, food pathogens, Logistic Models, Public Opinion, Food Microbiology, Female, Perception, heterogeneity, novel technology, Best-worst scaling
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 26 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
