• facebook

How Outrage Can be Quantified in Risk Assessment

Author: Jerzy Wolanin
Institution: The Main School of Fire Service
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5915-6905
Author: Paweł Kępka
Institution: The Main School of Fire Service
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8653-369X
Author: Oksana Telak
Institution: The Main School of Fire Service
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6103-3784
Year of publication: 2023
Source: Show
Pages: 141-160
DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.15804/npw20233607
PDF: npw/36/npw3607.pdf

How Outrage Can be Quantified in Risk Assessment

In the article the problem how an emotional state influences quantitative risk profile is discussed. Risk as a concept enhances two equivalent dimensions. The first dimension relates to experts’ risk assessment. The second one is related to public risk perception, named outrage. One can understand outrage as the emotional state concerning risk. Five different degrees of hazardous situations are described and public emotional attitude towards them is analyzed by structured interview. A correlation between the emotional attitude and readiness to act is calculated to describe amplification of risk by the emotional state. Then a risk profile is constructed.

Как возмущение может быть количественно оценено при оценке рисков

В статье обсуждается проблема влияния эмоционального состояния на количественный профиль риска. Риск как понятие усиливает два эквивалентных измерения. Первое измерение связано с экспертной оценкой рисков. Второй связан с общественным восприятием риска и называется возмущением. Возмущение можно понимать как эмоциональное состояние по отношению к риску. Описаны пять различных степеней опасных ситуаций и проанализировано эмоциональное отношение населения к ним с помощью структурированного интервью. Для описания усиления риска эмоциональным состоянием рассчитывается корреляция между эмоциональным настроем и готовностью к действию. Затем строится профиль риска.

REFERENCES:

  • Aven, T. (2011). On the new ISO guide in risk management terminology. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 96, 719–726.
  • Aven, T. (2012). The risk concept – historical and recent development trends. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 99, 33–44.
  • Bang Petersen, M. (2010). Distinct Emotions, Distinct Domains: Anger, Anxiety and Perception of Intentionality. The Journal of Politics, 72, 357–365.
  • Cao, J., Li, Y., Tian, Y. (2018). Emotional modelling and clarification of large – scale collection of scene images in a cluster environment. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.phone.0191064.
  • Chipangura, P. et al. (2016). An exploration of objectivism and social constructivism within the context of disaster risk. An Intern. Journal Disaster Prevention and Management, 25(2), 261–274.
  • Feldman Barret, L. (2017). Categories and their role in the science of emotion. Psychological Inquiry, 28(1), 20–26.
  • Gerkensmeier, B., Ratter, B.M.W., Vollmer M., Walsh, C. (2018). Managing coastial risks at the Wadden Sea: a societal perspective. Disaster Prevention and Management, 27(1).
  • Jonkman, S.N., Jongejan, R., Maaskant, B. (2011). The use of individual and societal risk criteria within the Dutch flood safety policy – Nationwide estimates of societal risk and policy application. Risk Analysis, 31(2).
  • Karlsson, B. et al. (2017). Possible opportunities for risk and capability assessment in the Baltic Sea Region” From Gaps to Caps – Project funded by European Commission, DG ECHO. Project number ECHO/SUB/2014/693890. Full name of project “Risk Management Capability on Gaps Identification in the BSR”.
  • Karlsson, B. et al. (2017). The Baltic Sea Region methodology for risk and capability assessments, a first approach” From Gaps to Caps – Project funded by European Commission, DG ECHO. Project number ECHO/SUB/2014/693890. Full name of project “Risk Management Capability on Gaps Identification in the BSR”.
  • Klein, R.A. (1997). Monograph on Risk Assessment for Emergency Services. The Institution of Fire Engineers.
  • Marszałek-Kawa, J., Plecka, D., Hołub, A. (2018). Social Security. Selected Aspects. Toruń: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek.
  • Sandman, P. (2012). Responding to community outrage: strategies for effective risk communication. A publication of American Industrial Hygiene Association.
  • Society for Risk Analysis Glossary (2015). SRA Committee on Foundation of Risk Analysis, June. Suddle, S. (2004). Physical Safety in Multiple Use of Space. Doctor thesis. The Technishe Universiteit van Delf. October.
  • Xie, X.F., Wang, M., Zhang, R., Li, J., Yu, Q.Y. (2011). The role of emotions in risk communication. Risk Analysis, 31(3).
  • Zhou, Y., Liu, M. (2012). Risk assessment of major hazard and its application in urban planning: a case study. Risk Analysis, 32(3).

risk profile perception of risk state of emotion outrage возмущение

Wiadomość do:

 

 

© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart