Health Risk & Society 

About: Health Risk & Society is an academic journal published by Taylor & Francis. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Risk perception & Risk management. It has an ISSN identifier of 1369-8575. Over the lifetime, 725 publications have been published receiving 23032 citations. The journal is also known as: Health, risk and society.

Gender, race, and perceived risk: The 'white male' effect

Abstract: Risks tend to be judged lower by men than by women and by white people than by people of colour. Prior research by Flynn, Slovic and Mertz [Risk Analysis, 14, pp. 1101-1108] found that these race and gender differences in risk perception in the United States were primarily due to 30% of the white male population who judge risks to be extremely low. The specificity of this finding suggests an explanation in terms of sociopolitical factors rather than biological factors. The study reported here presents new data from a recent national survey conducted in the United States. Although white males again stood apart with respect to their judgements of risk and their attitudes concerning worldviews, trust, and risk-related stigma, the results showed that the distinction between white males and others is more complex than originally thought. Further investigation of sociopolitical factors in risk judgements is recommended to clarify gender and racial differences.

Toxic effects of nanoparticles and nanomaterials: Implications for public health, risk assessment and the public perception of nanotechnology

Abstract: Nanomaterials are now being manufactured and used in many products. However, our knowledge of the human health effects and environmental concentrations of engineered nanomaterials or nanoparticles is incomplete. This article gives a toxicologists perspective, outlining possible routes of uptake by humans, environmental concentrations, known or suspected toxic effects, and the practical implication for human health risk assessments and public perception. Humans are already exposed to a range of natural and man-made nanoparticles in the air, and exposure via the food chain, water supply, and medical applications is likely. Toxicology studies on animals, and cells in vitro, raise the possibility of adverse effects on the immune system, oxidative stress related disorders, lung disease and inflammation. However, the doses needed to produce these effects are generally high and it remains to be seen if such exposure is possible via the environment or the work place. Data on exposure is also needed for r...

'Life would be pretty dull without risk': Voluntary risk-taking and its pleasures

Abstract: Most writing in the social sciences on risk-taking tends to represent it as the product of ignorance or irrationality. The modern subject tends to be portrayed in this writing as risk-aversive and fearful of risk, constantly seeking ways of avoiding it. While there has been an extensive literature on people's perceptions of risk, little empirical research has attempted to investigate the meanings given to voluntary risk-taking: that is, risk-taking that is undertaken without coercion in the full acknowledgement that risks are being confronted. In this article we present findings from our qualitative research on a group of Australians' risk knowledges and experiences, using in-depth interviews to explore the meanings given to risk and the discourses used to express ideas about risk. We focus here on what our interviewees had to say about their experiences of, and views about, voluntary risk-taking. We identify and discuss three dominant discourses in our interviewees' accounts: those of self-improvement, e...

Heading into the unknown: Everyday strategies for managing risk and uncertainty

Abstract: Within interdisciplinary risk research, strategies for managing risk and uncertainty based on cognitive rationality are seen as more effective than non-rational strategies, such as hope, belief, or avoidance. However this dichotomy between rational and irrational strategies neglects a whole range of everyday approaches to risk that are neither completely rational nor irrational as they may involve the use of prior knowledge and experience. These in between strategies include the use of emotion, trust, and intuition to make decisions, and they can be seen as complementing and overcoming some of the limitations of instrumental and calculative forms of risk and uncertainty management and therefore in combination they facilitate more effective control over the future. In late modern societies, individuals' decision-making has become increasingly important and problematic because the rising complexity and volatility of decision-making situations. Individuals have to make important or 'fateful' decisions in an almost reflex-like manner, without enough time or knowledge available. Such decision-making requires increased trust, for example in the experts with appropriate knowledge and skills. The important aspect of trust is less its implicit or unconscious aspect but the underlying experience-based knowledge. Similar to intuition, trust refers to tacit knowledge and pre-conscious awareness of reality. Intuition seems close to the kind of embodied (or even innate) knowledge high risk takers use. Trust and intuition both involve feelings and emotion. Positive affect is associated with trust while intuition can be expressed in emotional terms, e.g. when individuals use the sense that 'it feels right to me' as a basis for action. While experts may prescribe cognitive-rational strategies as the most effective response to risk, if they do not acknowledge and recognise the importance and capacity of non-rational and in between approaches then it is likely that individuals will disregard expert advice or absorb and transform it within their own experiences about and responses to risk. The potential benefits of strategies combining different elements and approaches will be lost.

Researching risk and the media

Abstract: The media are crucial players in the construction of, and communication about, risk. Yet their role is often under-theorised, and sometimes misrepresented or parodied. In particular, the media are accused of routine sensationalism. Journalists are blamed for exaggerating risk, ‘whipping up hysteria’ and distorting reality. Academic studies of the media, however, suggest a more complex picture. The first half of this article reflects on the theoretical and methodological considerations which inform studies of ‘risk reporting’ and highlights some of the key questions when designing or assessing such research. The second half of the article draws out some common findings about how ‘risk reporting’ operates, focusing, in particular, on what we know about ‘news values’ and media production processes. It outlines the factors influencing media coverage of risk: from the organisation and resources of different source agencies through to the news gathering routines of journalists, and reflects on the ‘cul...