期刊文献+

从常人理论看专家与公众对健康风险的认知差异 被引量:7

The Different Perceptions of Health Risk between Expertise and Public:A Lay Theory Perspective
下载PDF
导出
摘要 专家与民众的风险认知差异,存在并影响着风险沟通的效果。本研究以甲型H1N1流感为例,从常人理论的视角探讨专家与公众的风险认知差异。研究发现,甲流期间专家与公众在"可控性"、"熟悉度"等方面存在风险认知差异;而这种认知差异的背后,是专家与公众"先前知识"、"判断结构"与"健康观念"等方面的不同。因此,专家与公众的鸿沟并非来自知识的落差,科学理论与常人理论的内在差异才是导致专家与公众风险认知差异的根源。 Risk communication is affected by the differences of risk perception between experts and the public. This study takes H1N1 Flu as an example to explore such differences from the perspec tive of lay theory. The results shows that the differences of risk perception between experts and public exist in controllability and familiarity, which are caused by the differences of prior knowl edge, judged structure and healthy notion. Thus the differences of risk perception between experts and public are not resulted from knowledge gap but from the inner differences between scientific theories and lay theories.
出处 《科学与社会》 CSSCI 2015年第1期104-116,共13页 Science and Society
关键词 健康风险 风险沟通 专家与公众 常人理论 health risk, risk communication, expertise and public, lay theory
  • 相关文献

参考文献19

  • 1吴宜蓁.专家与民众:健康风险认知差距研究内涵检视[J].西南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版),2007,28(10):154-157. 被引量:13
  • 2张燕,虞海侠.风险沟通中公众对专家系统的信任危机[J].现代传播(中国传媒大学学报),2012,34(4):139-140. 被引量:17
  • 3周桂田.在地化风险之实践与理论缺口--迟滞型高科技风险社会.台湾社会研究(季刊),2002(45):69-122.
  • 4Clark A. M. "It's like an explosion in your life.-.": lay perspectives on stress and myocardial infarction. Journal of CLinical Nursing, 2003(12)544--553.
  • 5Furnham A. Cheng H. Lay theories of happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2000(1) : 227--246.
  • 6Furnham A. Thompson L.. Lay theories of horoin addiction. Social Science and Medicine, 1996(43): 29--40.
  • 7Levy S. R. , Chiu, C. Hong, Y. Lay Theories and Intergroup Relations. Group Processes Intergroup Relations, 2006,9 (1) : 5-- 24.
  • 8陈瑞芸,冯国蒙.理解、赋权与弥补鸿沟:于健尿传播研究连援”科字理论”及”常民埋论”.台湾休闲保健期刊,2012(8):231-242.
  • 9Furnham. A. Lay theories: everyday understanding of problems in the social sci- ences. New York: Pergamon Press. 1988:105.
  • 10James A. Trostle. Epidemiology and Culture. New York: Cambridge University Press. 2005.

二级参考文献17

  • 1保罗·斯洛维奇.《风险的感知》,赵延东等译,北京出版社2007年版.
  • 2奥尔特温·雷恩、伯内德·罗尔曼.《跨文化的风险感知》,赵延东、张虎彪译,北京出版社2007年版,第3页.
  • 3F. W. Allen, "Towards a Holistic Appreciation of Risk: The Challenge for Communicators and Policymakers", Science, Technology and Human Values, 1987 (12).
  • 4P. Slovic,"Perception of Risk", Science,Vol. 236, 1987.
  • 5E. Goffman, Stigma,Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1963, pp. 1-3.
  • 6Kasperson et al. , "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework", Risk Analysis, 1988(8).
  • 7A. Weinberg, "Is Nuclear Energy Acceptable ", Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 1977 (4).
  • 8[英]吉登斯著:《亲密关系的变革———现代社会中的性、爱和爱欲》,陈永国、汪民安译,社会科学文献出版社2001年版,第179-180页.
  • 9[英]吉登斯著:《现代性与自我认同———现代晚期的自我与社会》,赵旭东、东文译,生活.读书.新知三联书店1998年版,第275页.
  • 10Hansen,J.,Holm,L.,Frewer,L.,Robinson,P.,& Sandoe,P.(2003).“Beyond knowledge deficit:Recent research into lay and expert attitudes to food risks”.[J].Appetite,41:111-121.

共引文献55

同被引文献73

二级引证文献22

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部