期刊文献+

对嗜好品风险认知的国际比较 被引量:1

The International Comparative Research on the Risk Cognition of Addictions
下载PDF
导出
摘要 对北京、大阪、洛杉矶 3城市的市民就香烟和毒品的风险认知进行了抽样调查 ,并对其结果进行比较分析 .主要结果如下 :①中日美 3国大约 4/ 5的人对吸烟持负面性风险认知和评价 .在 3国中 ,美国人对吸烟的风险认知和危害性估计最高 ,中国居中 ,日本最低 ;②总体而言 ,中日美 3国约 9成以上的人对毒品持负面性风险认知和评价 .在 3国中 ,日本人对毒品的风险认知和不安感最高 .比较而言 ,美国人对毒品却表现出相对宽容的态度 ;③在 3国中 ,日本人对香烟的社会容纳度最高 ,而对毒品的容纳度最低 ;美国人对毒品的社会容纳度远高于中国和日本 ;中国对香烟和毒品的社会容纳度都相对较低 ,这将有利于禁烟和禁毒 . This sample survey on the risk cognition of cigarette and drugs was made in Beijing, Osaka, and Los Ageless. The comparative analysis shows the following results:①Almost 4/5 people in China, Japan and USA negatively evaluate the cigarette. For the risk cognition and the harmfulness estimation of cigarette, Americans are the highest, Chinese are the second and Japanese the lowest;②In general, over 90% people in the three countries negatively evaluate the drugs. Japanese have the highest risk cognition level and the highest anxiety level on the drugs. In comparison, Americans show relatively high tolerance level;③Japanese have the highest social tolerance level to cigarette and the lowest tolerance level to drugs. American's social tolerance level to drugs is much higher than Chinese and Japanese. In the mean time, Chinese show the lowest social tolerance level to cigarette and drugs. It is beneficial to ban the smoking and the drugs.
出处 《广州大学学报(自然科学版)》 CAS 2002年第6期81-85,共5页 Journal of Guangzhou University:Natural Science Edition
基金 本调查系中日合作项目
关键词 嗜好品 国际比较 风险认知 风险沟通 香烟 毒品 风险评价 社会容纳度 risk cognition risk communication cigarette drugs
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

  • 1[4]Covello V T, Sandman P M, Slovic P. Risk communication, risk statistics, and risk comparisons: a manual for plant managers[ M].Washington D.C., Chemical Manufacturers Association. 1988.
  • 2[5]Peters R G, Covello V T, McCallum D B. The determinant of trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: an empirical study[J].Risk Analysis, 1997(17): 43-54.
  • 3[6]Covello V T, McCallum D B, Pavlova M T(Eds). Effective risk communication: the role and responsibility of government and nongovernment organizations[ M]. N.Y.: Plenum Press, 1989.
  • 4[9]Lundgren R E. Risk communication: a handbook for communicating environmental, safety and health risks[M]. Ohio: Battelle Press, 1994.

同被引文献19

  • 1谢晓非,徐联仓.公众在风险认知中的偏差[J].心理科学进展,1996,6(2):23-26. 被引量:28
  • 2马步云.风险社会的文化透视[J].兰州学刊,2006(5):61-63. 被引量:4
  • 3林崇德等主编.心理学大辞典[M].上海:上海教育出版社,2003年.
  • 4Sowby, F. D, 'Radiation and Other Risks'E J]. HealthPhysics, 1965, 26: 879-887.
  • 5Starr, C. R., Whipple, C. 'Philosophical Basis for Risk Analysis' [J]. Annual Review of Energy, 1976(1 ): 621-661.
  • 6Slovic, R 'Perceived Risk, Trust, and Democracy' [J]. Risk Analysis, 1993(6): 674-683.
  • 7Rohrmann, B. 'Risk Perception of Different Social Groups: A Cross-national Comparison' [J]. Australian Journal of Psychology, 1994, 46: 151-167.
  • 8Thompson, M., Ellis, R., Wildavsky, A. Cultural Theory [M]. Colorado: Westview Press. 1990, 121-135.
  • 9Sjberg, L. 'Risk Perception: Experts and the Public' [J~. European Psychologist, 1993(1): 1-17.
  • 10Weinstein, N. D., Sandman, P. M., Roberts, N. E. 'Determinants of Self-protective Behavior: Home Radon Testing' [J]. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1990, 20: 781-800.

引证文献1

二级引证文献9

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