Slovic, Paul

Permanent URI for this collection

https://hdl.handle.net/1794/18931

Browse

Browsing Slovic, Paul by Author "Braman, Donald"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Affect, Values, and Nanotechnology Risk Perceptions: An Experimental Investigation
    (Yale Law School, 2007-03) Kahan, Dan; Slovic, Paul; Braman, Donald; Gastil, John; Cohen, Geoffrey
    Despite knowing little about nanotechnology (so to speak), members of the public readily form opinions on whether its potential risks outweigh its potential benefits. On what basis are they forming their judgments? How are their views likely to evolve as they become exposed to more information about this novel science? We conducted a survey experiment (N = 1,850) to answer these questions. We found that public perceptions of nanotechnology risks, like public perceptions of societal risks generally, are largely affect driven: individuals’ visceral reactions to nanotechnology (ones likely based on attitudes toward environmental risks generally) explain more of the variance in individuals’ perceptions of nanotechnology’s risks and benefits than does any other influence. These views are not static: even a small amount of information can generate changes in perceptions. But how those perceptions change depends heavily on individuals’ values. Using a between-subjects design, we found that individuals exposed to balanced information polarize along cultural and political lines relative to individuals not exposed to information. We discuss what these findings imply for understanding of risk perceptions generally and for the future of nanotechnology as a subject of political conflict and regulation.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Fear of Democracy: A Cultural Evaluation of Sunstein on Risk
    (Harvard Law School, 2006-01-01) Kahan, Dan; Slovic, Paul; Braman, Donald; Gastil, John
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The Second National Risk and Culture Study: Making Sense of—and Making Progress In— the American Culture War of Fact
    (Yale Law School, 2007-10) Kahan, Dan; Gastil, John; Braman, Donald; Cohen, Geoffrey; Slovic, Paul
    Cultural Cognition refers to the disposition to conform one's beliefs about societal risks to one's preferences for how society should be organized. Based on surveys and experiments involving some 5,000 Americans, the Second National Risk and Culture Study presents empirical evidence of the effect of this dynamic in generating conflict about global warming, school shootings, domestic terrorism, nanotechnology, and the mandatory vaccination of school-age girls against HPV, among other issues. The Study also presents evidence of risk-communication strategies that counteract cultural cognition. Because nuclear power affirms rather than threatens the identity of persons who hold individualist values, for example, proposing it as a solution to global warming makes persons who hold such values more willing to consider evidence that climate change is a serious risk. Because people tend to impute credibility to people who share their values, persons who hold hierarchical and egalitarian values are less likely to polarize when they observe people who hold their values advocating unexpected positions on the vaccination of young girls against HPV. Such techniques can help society to create a deliberative climate in which citizens converge on policies that are both instrumentally sound and expressively congenial to persons of diverse values.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The Tragedy of the Risk-Perception Commons: Culture Conflict, Rationality Conflict, and Climate Change
    (Yale Law School, 2011) Kahan, Dan; Peters, Ellen; Braman, Donald; Slovic, Paul; Wittlin, Maggie; Larrimore Ouellette, Lisa; Mandel, Gregory
    The conventional explanation for controversy over climate change emphasizes impediments to public understanding: limited popular knowledge of science, the inability of ordinary citizens to assess technical information, and the resulting widespread use of unreliable cognitive heuristics to assess risk. A large survey of U.S. adults (N = 1540) found little support for this account. On the whole, the most scien- tifically literate and numerate subjects were slightly less likely, not more, to see climate change as a serious threat than the least scientifically literate and numerate ones. More importantly, greater scientific literacy and numeracy were associated with greater cultural polarization: respondents predisposed by their values to dismiss climate change evidence became more dismissive, and those predisposed by their values to credit such evidence more concerned, as science literacy and numeracy increased. We suggest that this evidence reflects a conflict between two levels of rationality: the individual level, which is characterized by the citizens’ effective use of their knowledge and reasoning capacities to form risk perceptions that express their cultural commitments; and the collective level, which is characterized by citizens’ failure to converge on the best available scientific evidence on how to promote their common welfare. Dispelling this “tragedy of the risk-perception commons,” we argue, should be understood as the central aim of the science of science communication.