The Experts below are selected from a list of 360 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Michael Siegrist - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
low risks high Public Concern the cases of persistent organic pollutants pops heavy metals and nanotech particles
Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 2010Co-Authors: Roland W Scholz, Michael SiegristAbstract:ABSTRACT Risk is an ancient, historic concept; almost everybody has some subjective understanding of what is meant by it. However, there are different types of knowledge, notions, interests, and processes involved both in science-based risk assessment and subjective risk perception. In the present article, we show how risk assessment and risk perception are intricately intertwined. This is exemplified by introducing the state-of-the-art risk assessments applied to three cases (i.e., heavy metals, POPs, and nanotech particles), each with their own unique history and degree of scientific understanding. We elaborate that, when dealing with risk, actors employ different notions (e.g., pure vs. speculative risk), processes (e.g., affective involvement in case) and relations (e.g., trust depending on benefiting from risk) depending on their knowledge, Concern, and interests. Finally, we argue that it is important to combine studies on risk perception and risk assessment at an early stage of technology developme...
-
low risks high Public Concern the cases of persistent organic pollutants pops heavy metals and nanotech particles
Social Science Research Network, 2008Co-Authors: Roland W Scholz, Michael SiegristAbstract:Risk is an ancient, historic concept. It is a primitive in the sense that almost everybody has some subjective understanding of what is meant by risk. There are, however, different definitions and notions of risk. For instance, the notion of pure risk only considers negative events or losses. The term speculative risk, on the other hand, incorporates the evaluation of both benefit and harm. Furthermore, it is important to distinguish between science-based risk assessments and subjective, individual and Public risk perception. Scientific risk assessment consists of well-defined procedures and methods for assessing the likelihood of future negative events. Individual and Public risk perceptions are affected by what is officially stated about the effects of certain pollutants, technologies or instances. Risk assessment and risk perception are to some extent interrelated. We introduce some fundamentals of risk assessment and risk perception and report what is known about these in the significant cases of heavy metals, POPs and nanotechnology. To date, the three cases do not represent stigmatized risks, as is the case with nuclear material or genetically modified organisms. But all three cases embody significant environmental risks. We will report on possible risks and on the research examining Public risk perception.
Robert J Brulle - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
elite cues media coverage and Public Concern an integrated path analysis of Public opinion on climate change 2001 2013
Environmental Politics, 2017Co-Authors: Jason T Carmichael, Robert J BrulleAbstract:ABSTRACTTo analyze the factors affecting US Public Concern about the threat of climate change between January 2002 and December 2013, data from 74 separate surveys are used to construct quarterly measures of Public Concern over global climate change. Five factors should account for changes in levels of Concern: extreme weather events, Public access to accurate scientific information, media coverage, elite cues, and movement/countermovement advocacy. Structural equation modeling indicates that elite cues, movement advocacy efforts, weather, and structural economic factors influence the level of Public Concern about climate change. While media coverage exerts an important influence, it is itself largely a function of elite cues and economic factors. Promulgation to the Public of scientific information on climate change has no effect. Information-based science advocacy has had only a minor effect on Public Concern, while political mobilization by elites and advocacy groups is critical in influencing climate ...
-
the great divide understanding the role of media and other drivers of the partisan divide in Public Concern over climate change in the usa 2001 2014
Climatic Change, 2017Co-Authors: Jason T Carmichael, Robert J Brulle, Joanna K HuxsterAbstract:Recent scholarship has identified a large and growing divide on how RePublicans and Democrats view the issue of climate change. A number of these studies have suggested that this polarization is a product of systematic efforts to spread doubt about the reality of climate change through the media in general and conservative media in particular. However, research to date has largely relied on speculation about such a relationship rather than empirical evidence. We improve on existing research by conducting an empirical analysis of the factors affecting national-level, quarterly shifts in Public Concern about climate change between January 2001 and December 2014. Our analysis focuses on the potential role played by four factors that should account for changes in levels of Concern regarding climate change: (1) media coverage, (2) extreme weather, (3) issuance of major scientific reports, and (4) changes in economic activity and foreign conflict. Some results suggest that partisan media influences beliefs in ways expected by communication scholars who describe “echo chamber” effects and “boomerang” effects. Among other supporting evidence, we find that partisan media not only strengthen views of like-minded audiences but also when RePublicans are presented with opposing frames about climate change from liberal media, they appear to reject the messages such that they are less Concerned about the issue. Findings also demonstrate that the dissemination of science increases Concern about climate change among Democrats but has no influence on RePublicans. Finally, extreme weather does not increase Concern among Democrats or RePublicans. Implications for future research are discussed.
-
shifting Public opinion on climate change an empirical assessment of factors influencing Concern over climate change in the u s 2002 2010
Climatic Change, 2012Co-Authors: Robert J Brulle, Jason T Carmichael, Craig J JenkinsAbstract:This paper conducts an empirical analysis of the factors affecting U.S. Public Concern about the threat of climate change between January 2002 and December 2010. Utilizing Stimson’s method of constructing aggregate opinion measures, data from 74 separate surveys over a 9-year period are used to construct quarterly measures of Public Concern over global climate change. We examine five factors that should account for changes in levels of Concern: 1) extreme weather events, 2) Public access to accurate scientific information, 3) media coverage, 4) elite cues, and 5) movement/countermovement advocacy. A time-series analysis indicates that elite cues and structural economic factors have the largest effect on the level of Public Concern about climate change. While media coverage exerts an important influence, this coverage is itself largely a function of elite cues and economic factors. Weather extremes have no effect on aggregate Public opinion. Promulgation of scientific information to the Public on climate change has a minimal effect. The implication would seem to be that information-based science advocacy has had only a minor effect on Public Concern, while political mobilization by elites and advocacy groups is critical in influencing climate change Concern.
Jason T Carmichael - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
elite cues media coverage and Public Concern an integrated path analysis of Public opinion on climate change 2001 2013
Environmental Politics, 2017Co-Authors: Jason T Carmichael, Robert J BrulleAbstract:ABSTRACTTo analyze the factors affecting US Public Concern about the threat of climate change between January 2002 and December 2013, data from 74 separate surveys are used to construct quarterly measures of Public Concern over global climate change. Five factors should account for changes in levels of Concern: extreme weather events, Public access to accurate scientific information, media coverage, elite cues, and movement/countermovement advocacy. Structural equation modeling indicates that elite cues, movement advocacy efforts, weather, and structural economic factors influence the level of Public Concern about climate change. While media coverage exerts an important influence, it is itself largely a function of elite cues and economic factors. Promulgation to the Public of scientific information on climate change has no effect. Information-based science advocacy has had only a minor effect on Public Concern, while political mobilization by elites and advocacy groups is critical in influencing climate ...
-
the great divide understanding the role of media and other drivers of the partisan divide in Public Concern over climate change in the usa 2001 2014
Climatic Change, 2017Co-Authors: Jason T Carmichael, Robert J Brulle, Joanna K HuxsterAbstract:Recent scholarship has identified a large and growing divide on how RePublicans and Democrats view the issue of climate change. A number of these studies have suggested that this polarization is a product of systematic efforts to spread doubt about the reality of climate change through the media in general and conservative media in particular. However, research to date has largely relied on speculation about such a relationship rather than empirical evidence. We improve on existing research by conducting an empirical analysis of the factors affecting national-level, quarterly shifts in Public Concern about climate change between January 2001 and December 2014. Our analysis focuses on the potential role played by four factors that should account for changes in levels of Concern regarding climate change: (1) media coverage, (2) extreme weather, (3) issuance of major scientific reports, and (4) changes in economic activity and foreign conflict. Some results suggest that partisan media influences beliefs in ways expected by communication scholars who describe “echo chamber” effects and “boomerang” effects. Among other supporting evidence, we find that partisan media not only strengthen views of like-minded audiences but also when RePublicans are presented with opposing frames about climate change from liberal media, they appear to reject the messages such that they are less Concerned about the issue. Findings also demonstrate that the dissemination of science increases Concern about climate change among Democrats but has no influence on RePublicans. Finally, extreme weather does not increase Concern among Democrats or RePublicans. Implications for future research are discussed.
-
shifting Public opinion on climate change an empirical assessment of factors influencing Concern over climate change in the u s 2002 2010
Climatic Change, 2012Co-Authors: Robert J Brulle, Jason T Carmichael, Craig J JenkinsAbstract:This paper conducts an empirical analysis of the factors affecting U.S. Public Concern about the threat of climate change between January 2002 and December 2010. Utilizing Stimson’s method of constructing aggregate opinion measures, data from 74 separate surveys over a 9-year period are used to construct quarterly measures of Public Concern over global climate change. We examine five factors that should account for changes in levels of Concern: 1) extreme weather events, 2) Public access to accurate scientific information, 3) media coverage, 4) elite cues, and 5) movement/countermovement advocacy. A time-series analysis indicates that elite cues and structural economic factors have the largest effect on the level of Public Concern about climate change. While media coverage exerts an important influence, this coverage is itself largely a function of elite cues and economic factors. Weather extremes have no effect on aggregate Public opinion. Promulgation of scientific information to the Public on climate change has a minimal effect. The implication would seem to be that information-based science advocacy has had only a minor effect on Public Concern, while political mobilization by elites and advocacy groups is critical in influencing climate change Concern.
Roland W Scholz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
low risks high Public Concern the cases of persistent organic pollutants pops heavy metals and nanotech particles
Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 2010Co-Authors: Roland W Scholz, Michael SiegristAbstract:ABSTRACT Risk is an ancient, historic concept; almost everybody has some subjective understanding of what is meant by it. However, there are different types of knowledge, notions, interests, and processes involved both in science-based risk assessment and subjective risk perception. In the present article, we show how risk assessment and risk perception are intricately intertwined. This is exemplified by introducing the state-of-the-art risk assessments applied to three cases (i.e., heavy metals, POPs, and nanotech particles), each with their own unique history and degree of scientific understanding. We elaborate that, when dealing with risk, actors employ different notions (e.g., pure vs. speculative risk), processes (e.g., affective involvement in case) and relations (e.g., trust depending on benefiting from risk) depending on their knowledge, Concern, and interests. Finally, we argue that it is important to combine studies on risk perception and risk assessment at an early stage of technology developme...
-
low risks high Public Concern the cases of persistent organic pollutants pops heavy metals and nanotech particles
Social Science Research Network, 2008Co-Authors: Roland W Scholz, Michael SiegristAbstract:Risk is an ancient, historic concept. It is a primitive in the sense that almost everybody has some subjective understanding of what is meant by risk. There are, however, different definitions and notions of risk. For instance, the notion of pure risk only considers negative events or losses. The term speculative risk, on the other hand, incorporates the evaluation of both benefit and harm. Furthermore, it is important to distinguish between science-based risk assessments and subjective, individual and Public risk perception. Scientific risk assessment consists of well-defined procedures and methods for assessing the likelihood of future negative events. Individual and Public risk perceptions are affected by what is officially stated about the effects of certain pollutants, technologies or instances. Risk assessment and risk perception are to some extent interrelated. We introduce some fundamentals of risk assessment and risk perception and report what is known about these in the significant cases of heavy metals, POPs and nanotechnology. To date, the three cases do not represent stigmatized risks, as is the case with nuclear material or genetically modified organisms. But all three cases embody significant environmental risks. We will report on possible risks and on the research examining Public risk perception.
John T A Hsu - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
pyrazole compound bpr1p0034 with potent and selective anti influenza virus activity
Journal of Biomedical Science, 2010Co-Authors: Shinru Shih, Tzuyun Chu, Gadarla Randheer Reddy, Sungnain Tseng, Hsiunling Chen, Wenfang Tang, Jiannyih Yeh, Yusheng Chao, John T A HsuAbstract:Background Influenza viruses are a major cause of morbidity and mortality around the world. More recently, a swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) virus that is spreading via human-to-human transmission has become a serious Public Concern. Although vaccination is the primary strategy for preventing infections, influenza antiviral drugs play an important role in a comprehensive approach to controlling illness and transmission. In addition, a search for influenza-inhibiting drugs is particularly important in the face of high rate of emergence of influenza strains resistant to several existing influenza antivirals.
