- JD Solomon
- 2 days ago
Unlike many risk managers, engineers, and other technical professionals, social scientists have a long-held belief that risk is more subjective than objective. “Risk does not exist ’out there,’ independent of our minds and cultures, waiting to be measured.”[9] Instead, risk is a concept human beings invented to help understand and cope with the dangers and uncertainties of life.
Social scientists would say that, although these dangers are real, there is no such thing as “real risk” or “objective risk. “Subjective judgments are made at every stage of the assessment process, from the initial structuring of a risk problem to deciding which endpoints or consequences to include in the analysis, identifying and estimating exposures, choosing dose-response relationships, and so on.[10]
“Danger is real, but risk is socially constructed. Rare events expose how psychology, perception, and power shape environmental risk far more than technical models alone.”
Risk perceptions and risk attitudes play a large role in the psychology of risk, risk treatment, and risk communications. One finding is that laypeople typically prefer to have more governmental regulation when confronted with risks, which are deemed to be beyond their control, catastrophic, or whose consequences have an inequitable effect. On the other hand, a more laissez-faire attitude results when risks are perceived as unnoticeable, longer term, or new.
Danger is real, but risk is socially constructed.[11] To many social scientists and psychologists, risk analysis, risk treatment, and associated communications are a blending of science with social, cultural, and political factors. And those who hold power also control the communication; winners write history.[12] This is particularly true in the case of rare events.
An example of the scenario discussed in the aforementioned paragraph could be climate change. Climate change is considered a rare event, and therefore risk communication requires a four-fold approach: scientists and engineers to attest to its accuracy; decision scientists to attest to its relevance; social scientists to attest to its clarity; and communication designers to attest to its format. The accuracy, tone, and comprehensibility of any communication can be undermined if any of these four cannot be attested.[13]
References
[9] Paul Slovic and Elke U. Weber, “Perception of Risk Posed by Extreme Events,” Presented at the conference “Risk Management Strategies in an Uncertain World,” Palisades, NY, Apr. 12-13, 2002, available at https://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/chrr/documents/meetings/roundtable/white_papers/slovic_wp.pdf
[10] Ibid.
[11] Paul Slovic, “Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk-Assessment Battlefield,” Risk Analysis 19, no. 4 (1999), available at http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1224&context=uclf.
[12] Analogous to the statement that “history is written by the victors,” attributed to Machiavelli, Winston Churchill, Walter Benjamin, and others.
[13] Baruch Fischoff, “Nonpersuasive Communication about Matters of Greatest Urgency: Climate Change,” Environmental Science & Technology 41, no. 21 (Nov. 1, 2007), 7204-7208, available at https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/sds/docs/fischhoff/NonpersuasiveCommMatters.pdf.
This article is an excerpt from:
Solomon, J. D., & Vallero, D. (2016, June 1). From our partners – Communicating risk and resiliency: Special considerations for rare events. Center for Infrastructure Protection & Homeland Security. https://cip.gmu.edu/2016/06/01/partners-communicating-risk-resiliency-special-considerations-rare-events/
Additional Resources on Rare Events from JD Solomon
JD Solomon champions practical communication skills that help technical professionals convey complex ideas clearly and confidently. Learn more at www.jdsolomonsolutions.com and www.communicatingwithfinesse.com.
