What is it about?
Risk can be understood in term of the complementary dimensions "safety" and "danger." Importantly, which of those you chose when making a judgment influences the perception of risk. Risk judgments framed in terms of safety (How safe is it?) resulted in more cautious, conservative judgments than when framed in terms of danger (How dangerous is it?), irrespective of the objective risk of the judged object. The question frame directs the decision maker's attention in a way that guides selective evidence collection and analysis. This influence on risk perception has an indirect influence on behavior.
Photo by Mihály Köles on Unsplash
Why is it important?
Our findings suggest that the question frame directed attention in a way that guided selective evidence sampling rather than indicating a valence-consistent or communication-driven framing effect. These findings have the potential to inform the development of policies and practices that harness question framing in domains of applied risk perception and risk communication. The adoption of a procedure strategy such as that afforded by framing risk judgment questions can boost people’s natural decision making competencies in order to ensure safer risk perceptions and behavior.
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Should I judge safety or danger? Perceived risk depends on the question frame., Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied, September 2021, American Psychological Association (APA), DOI: 10.1037/xap0000354.
You can read the full text:
Should I Judge Safety or Danger? Online talk for the Norwegian Avalanche Association
Invited talk presented to the Norwegian Avalanche Association during their monthly "Avalunch" webinar
Should We Judge Danger or Safety in Avalanche Terrain
Popular science article based on the original scientific publication. Stephensen, M. B., Landrø, M., & Hendrikx, J. (2021) Should we judge danger or safety in avalanche terrain. The Avalanche Journal, 126.
The following have contributed to this page