An integrative framework for mapping the psychological landscape of risk perception.

We vary greatly in our perception of risk, not just because of differences between risks themselves, but also because of individual, contextual and cultural differences too. To better understand and predict responses to risk, we need to (a) integrate these components, combining approaches from different psychological disciplines and (b) also consider risk tolerance - how individuals trade-off between risks and benefits. We therefore developed an ICONS (individual, contextual, cognitive, social) framework; using it across two empirical studies (n = 4228) to examine how individuals perceive and respond to the quotidian risks associated with consumer products. Three dimensions underlined risk perceptions: benefits, dread and individual responsibility. Risk tolerance was typically predicted by interactions between individual (demographic, cultural worldview, personality) and contextual (product type/category, harm information) factors. In turn, perceived dread, benefits and individual differences shaped how likely participants were to communicate risk information. Our results demonstrate for the first time how the interaction between individual, cognitive (risk tolerance, intensity), contextual, and social (risk communication) factors is key to understanding and predicting risk perceptions. Together, our findings help explain why societal responses to risks are often difficult to predict and have implications for the spread, and amplification, of risk information.

Impact of disease characteristics and knowledge on public risk perception of zoonoses.

Zoonoses represent a global public health threat. Understanding lay perceptions of risk associated with these diseases can better inform proportionate policy interventions that mitigate their current and future impacts. While individual zoonoses (e.g. bovine spongiform encephalopathy) have received scientific and public attention, we know little about how multiple zoonotic diseases vary relative to each other in lay risk perceptions. To this end, we examined public perceptions of 11 zoonoses across 12 qualitative attributes of risk among the UK public (n = 727, volunteer sample), using an online survey. We found that attribute ratings were predominantly explained via two basic dimensions of risk related to public knowledge and dread. We also show that, despite participants reporting low familiarity with most of the diseases presented, zoonoses were perceived as essentially avoidable. These findings imply that infection is viewed as dependent upon actions under personal control which has significant implications for policy development.

An appropriate verbal probability lexicon for communicating surgical risks is unlikely to exist.

Effective risk communication about medical procedures is critical to ethical shared decision-making. Here, we explore the potential for development of an evidence-based lexicon for verbal communication of surgical risk. We found that Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT) surgeons expressed a preference for communicating such risks using verbal probability expressions (VPEs; e.g., "high risk"). However, there was considerable heterogeneity in the expressions they reported using (Study 1). Study 2 compared ENT surgeons' and laypeople's (i.e., potential patients) interpretations of the ten most frequent VPEs listed in Study 1. While both groups displayed considerable variability in interpretations, lay participants demonstrated more, as well as providing systematically higher interpretations than those of surgeons. Study 3 found that lay participants were typically unable to provide unique VPEs to differentiate between the ranges of (low) probabilities required. Taken together, these results add to arguments that reliance on VPEs for surgical risk communication is ill-advised. Not only are there systematic interpretational differences between surgeons and potential patients, but the coarse granularity of VPEs raises severe challenges for developing an appropriate evidence-based lexicon for surgical risk communication. We caution against the use of VPEs in any risk context characterized by low, but very different, probabilities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Testing the adaptability of people's use of attribute frame information.

The informational leakage account of attribute framing effects proposes that a communicator's choice of frame provides informational value, such that different frames are not informationally equivalent. Across five studies communicating food risks, we investigated the adaptability of communication recipients' (our participants) use of frame information by manipulating the degree to which the communicator ostensibly had a choice over how the information was framed. Within-participants framing effects were observed across all conditions of all studies. Only in Study 4 (the only study in which communicator choice was manipulated within-participants) was there any evidence for an attenuation of framing effects where the communicator was not responsible for how the information was framed. Overall, regardless of whether or not framing effects are driven by the informational value contained in a communicator's choice of frame, people show little sensitivity to situations where that choice is removed.

Factors associated with poor self-reported health within the UK military and comparisons with the general population: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the self-rated health of the UK military and explore factors associated with poor self-rated health. Compare self-rated health of the military to the general population. DESIGN: A cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 7626 serving and ex-serving UK military personnel, aged between 25 and 49; 19,452,300 civilians from England and Wales. SETTING: United Kingdom (military), England and Wales (civilians). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self rated health for both populations. Additional data for the military sample included measures of symptoms of common mental disorder (General Health Questionnaire-12), probable post-traumatic stress disorder (post-traumatic stress disorder checklist Civilian Version), alcohol use (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test), smoking behaviour, history of self-harm and body mass index. RESULTS: In the military sample, poor self-rated health was significantly associated with: common mental disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder symptomology, a history of self-harm, being obese, older age (ages 35-49) and current smoking status. However, the majority of military personnel report good health, with levels of poor self-rated health (13%) not significantly different to those reported by the general population (12.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Self-rated health appears to relate to aspects of both physical and psychological health. The link between poor self-rated health and psychological ill-health emphasises the need for military support services to continue addressing mental health problems.