The taxonomy of risky activities and technologies: Revisiting the 1978 psychological dimensions of perceptions of technological risks

The objective of this study is to replicate the original study by Fischhoff et al. (1978) and its replication by Fox-Glassman and Weber (2016) and to examine whether risk perceptions for the previously studied activities and technologies have changed over the past 40 years, especially when activities/technologies related to contemporary concerns are included. To achieve this goal, the list of activities/technologies has been modified. To facilitate the analysis of individual data, all participants were asked to rate the benefits and risks of 24 activities. The within-participant approach was also used to achieve the second objective of our study: to analyze the relationship between perceived benefits and risks. In summary, the design of this study differed from previous studies in the following ways: (1) Nine activities/technologies were added related to contemporary concerns such as global warming and fake news on the Internet; (2) all participants rated both benefits and risks; (3) data were collected online (as in the 2016 study); (4) the study was conducted by Prolific with a sample size large enough to detect medium-size effects (n = 382). The two-factor structure proposed by Fischhoff et al.-unknown risk and dread risk-was confirmed on aggregated data for the new set of hazards, which included novel hazards. At the level of individual data, modest support for this structure was observed, and a very strong inverse relationship between perceived benefits and risks was observed.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Risk Analysis
Published
2025-02-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.17718
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Risk Perception and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.40
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The taxonomy of risky activities and technologies: Revisiting the 1978 psychological dimensions of perceptions of technological risks

Joanna Sokołowska, Zofia Rey
2 citations
Risk Analysis
Risk Perception and Management
8.40
article

The taxonomy of risky activities and technologies: Revisiting the 1978 psychological dimensions of perceptions of technological risks

Joanna Sokołowska, Zofia Rey
article en
2 citations

Abstract

The objective of this study is to replicate the original study by Fischhoff et al. (1978) and its replication by Fox-Glassman and Weber (2016) and to examine whether risk perceptions for the previously studied activities and technologies have changed over the past 40 years, especially when activities/technologies related to contemporary concerns are included. To achieve this goal, the list of activities/technologies has been modified. To facilitate the analysis of individual data, all participants were asked to rate the benefits and risks of 24 activities. The within-participant approach was also used to achieve the second objective of our study: to analyze the relationship between perceived benefits and risks. In summary, the design of this study differed from previous studies in the following ways: (1) Nine activities/technologies were added related to contemporary concerns such as global warming and fake news on the Internet; (2) all participants rated both benefits and risks; (3) data were collected online (as in the 2016 study); (4) the study was conducted by Prolific with a sample size large enough to detect medium-size effects (n = 382). The two-factor structure proposed by Fischhoff et al.-unknown risk and dread risk-was confirmed on aggregated data for the new set of hazards, which included novel hazards. At the level of individual data, modest support for this structure was observed, and a very strong inverse relationship between perceived benefits and risks was observed.

Risk AnalysisVol. 45(12)
Uniwersytet SWPS (PL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Risk Perception and Management
8.40
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.