لخّصلي

خدمة تلخيص النصوص العربية أونلاين،قم بتلخيص نصوصك بضغطة واحدة من خلال هذه الخدمة

نتيجة التلخيص (50%)

8. CONCLUSION
Risk perception is hard to understand. Several
factors influence it, but some of the models suggested
for risk perception have failed to explain more than a
rather small fraction of it. Some investigators have
apparently been satisfied with statistical significance
as a criterion of validity, but that is a counterproductive
strategy.
(59)
Others have presented seemingly persuasive
results, but they have been based on averages
and therefore quite misleading as to the explanatory
power of the models. Practices such as these have
clouded the view of risk perception and contributed
to a premature closure. In this paper an attempt has
been made to show that much remains to be done and
some ideas about how better models of risk perception
can be formulated have been suggested.
The model suggested in Section VII implies a different
psychological functioning in risk perception
than in other models. The psychometric model is cognitive
in its conception and flavor—risks are indeed
perceived
according to this tradition, which coined
the very term “risk perception.” Here, risk perception
is a function of properties of the hazards. Even if
many more properties than real risk are considered in
the model, a stimulus–response kind of thinking is
still behind it. Cultural Theory, on the other hand, is very
different. Here, risk perception is a reflection of the
social context an individual finds him- or herself in.
The reason why this approach fails is probably that
the social context is construed in a very abstract, farfetched
manner, and that social context per se by no
means is the sole determinant of risk perception, if it
has any influence at all, which remains to be seen.
If attitude is a crucial factor in risk perception,
and the present results suggest this, then “perception”
is largely an expression of specific values (not
general; see Section VI). Risk communication would,
with such a stance, require a very different approach
from that implied by other models. The whole literature
on attitude change becomes relevant, and this is
a very extensive and well-established field. Also other
components enter— risk sensitivity and specific fear.
These are aspects that relate in a natural way to personality
and clinical psychology.
A further theme of interest is that of the
consequences
of risk perception. It is simplistic just to assume
that a high level of perceived risk carries with it
demands for risk mitigation. Other factors are of importance,
(60,61)
but space precludes a detailed discussion
here.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This is a study within the CEC project RISKPERCOM
(Contract Fl4PCT950016), supported also
by the Swedish Council for Planning and Coordination
of Research (FRN), the Swedish Council for
Humanistic and Social Science Research (HSFR), the
Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate (SKI), and
the Swedish Radiation Protection Institute (SSI).
REFERENCES
1. L. Sjöberg, “Risk Perception by the Public and by Experts: A
Dilemma in Risk Management,” Human Ecology Review 6,
1–9 (1999).
2. L. Sjöberg, “Policy Implications of Risk Perception Research:
A Case of the Emperor’s New Clothes?” paper presented at
Risk Analysis: Opening the Process, organized by Society for
Risk Analysis—Europe, Paris, October 11–14, 1998.
3. L. Sjöberg, A. af Wåhlberg, and P. Kvist, “The Rise of Risk: Risk
Related Bills Submitted to The Swedish Parliament in 1964–65
and 1993–95,” Journal of Risk Research 1, 191–195 (1998).
Table V. Regression Analyses of General Risk of Domestic
Nuclear Power and X-ray Diagnostics, General Risk
b value
Explanatory variable
Nuclear
power
X-ray
diagnostics
Attitude 0.304 0.162
Specific radiation risk (nonnuclear) 0.297 0.225
General risk sensitivity (nonnuclear,
nonradiation) 0.259 0.336
R2
adj 0.459 0.33


النص الأصلي


  1. CONCLUSION
    Risk perception is hard to understand. Several
    factors influence it, but some of the models suggested
    for risk perception have failed to explain more than a
    rather small fraction of it. Some investigators have
    apparently been satisfied with statistical significance
    as a criterion of validity, but that is a counterproductive
    strategy.
    (59)
    Others have presented seemingly persuasive
    results, but they have been based on averages
    and therefore quite misleading as to the explanatory
    power of the models. Practices such as these have
    clouded the view of risk perception and contributed
    to a premature closure. In this paper an attempt has
    been made to show that much remains to be done and
    some ideas about how better models of risk perception
    can be formulated have been suggested.
    The model suggested in Section VII implies a different
    psychological functioning in risk perception
    than in other models. The psychometric model is cognitive
    in its conception and flavor—risks are indeed
    perceived
    according to this tradition, which coined
    the very term “risk perception.” Here, risk perception
    is a function of properties of the hazards. Even if
    many more properties than real risk are considered in
    the model, a stimulus–response kind of thinking is
    still behind it. Cultural Theory, on the other hand, is very
    different. Here, risk perception is a reflection of the
    social context an individual finds him- or herself in.
    The reason why this approach fails is probably that
    the social context is construed in a very abstract, farfetched
    manner, and that social context per se by no
    means is the sole determinant of risk perception, if it
    has any influence at all, which remains to be seen.
    If attitude is a crucial factor in risk perception,
    and the present results suggest this, then “perception”
    is largely an expression of specific values (not
    general; see Section VI). Risk communication would,
    with such a stance, require a very different approach
    from that implied by other models. The whole literature
    on attitude change becomes relevant, and this is
    a very extensive and well-established field. Also other
    components enter— risk sensitivity and specific fear.
    These are aspects that relate in a natural way to personality
    and clinical psychology.
    A further theme of interest is that of the
    consequences
    of risk perception. It is simplistic just to assume
    that a high level of perceived risk carries with it
    demands for risk mitigation. Other factors are of importance,
    (60,61)
    but space precludes a detailed discussion
    here.
    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    This is a study within the CEC project RISKPERCOM
    (Contract Fl4PCT950016), supported also
    by the Swedish Council for Planning and Coordination
    of Research (FRN), the Swedish Council for
    Humanistic and Social Science Research (HSFR), the
    Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate (SKI), and
    the Swedish Radiation Protection Institute (SSI).
    REFERENCES

  2. L. Sjöberg, “Risk Perception by the Public and by Experts: A
    Dilemma in Risk Management,” Human Ecology Review 6,
    1–9 (1999).

  3. L. Sjöberg, “Policy Implications of Risk Perception Research:
    A Case of the Emperor’s New Clothes?” paper presented at
    Risk Analysis: Opening the Process, organized by Society for
    Risk Analysis—Europe, Paris, October 11–14, 1998.

  4. L. Sjöberg, A. af Wåhlberg, and P. Kvist, “The Rise of Risk: Risk
    Related Bills Submitted to The Swedish Parliament in 1964–65
    and 1993–95,” Journal of Risk Research 1, 191–195 (1998).
    Table V. Regression Analyses of General Risk of Domestic
    Nuclear Power and X-ray Diagnostics, General Risk
    b value
    Explanatory variable
    Nuclear
    power
    X-ray
    diagnostics
    Attitude 0.304 0.162
    Specific radiation risk (nonnuclear) 0.297 0.225
    General risk sensitivity (nonnuclear,
    nonradiation) 0.259 0.336
    R2
    adj 0.459 0.33

تلخيص النصوص العربية والإنجليزية أونلاين

تلخيص النصوص آلياً

تلخيص النصوص العربية والإنجليزية اليا باستخدام الخوارزميات الإحصائية وترتيب وأهمية الجمل في النص

تحميل التلخيص

يمكنك تحميل ناتج التلخيص بأكثر من صيغة متوفرة مثل PDF أو ملفات Word أو حتي نصوص عادية

رابط دائم

يمكنك مشاركة رابط التلخيص بسهولة حيث يحتفظ الموقع بالتلخيص لإمكانية الإطلاع عليه في أي وقت ومن أي جهاز ماعدا الملخصات الخاصة

مميزات أخري

نعمل علي العديد من الإضافات والمميزات لتسهيل عملية التلخيص وتحسينها


آخر التلخيصات

A hurricane is ...

A hurricane is a severe storm. It is a cyclonic storm, which means that the hurricane has a circular...

أهمية سلوك المس...

أهمية سلوك المستهلك يساعد في تصميم سياسات الإنتاج ، مع مراعاة تفضيل المستهلكين. يساعد في معرفة أن ا...

بإلقاء نظرة فاح...

بإلقاء نظرة فاحصة على الرسم البياني الثاني ، يمكننا أن نرى أن النشاط المفضل للفتيات هو الرقص ، حيث ي...

تتمثل أهداف الم...

تتمثل أهداف الموؤششة في الوشول لأدنى مشتوى من الحوادث والإصابات والأمراس المزمنة والمحافظة على البيئ...

A two-position ...

A two-position controller, also called an ON/OFF controller, is the most basic type of process contr...

Verisimilitude ...

Verisimilitude in Prose fiction is used to describe the situation whereby the story is presented in ...

العوامل الخارجي...

العوامل الخارجية تميز فسيفساء المناعة الذاتية. يساهم االستعداد الوراثي المعقدوعوامل الخطر الهرمونية ...

The most common...

The most common of the hereditary disaccharidase deficiencies is the sucraseisomaltase defect. A rec...

The protest ove...

The protest over the Victnam War that was held at Kent State University, Ohio, in May 1970, made int...

تعد المياه العذ...

تعد المياه العذبة من اهم مقومات الحياه وديمومتها , وهي من اهم الموارد الطبيعية ومورد محدود معرض للتد...

التزامات شركة ا...

التزامات شركة التأمين 1. تلتزم الشركة بتعويض المؤمن له عن الخسارة أو التلف الذي يلحق بالمركبة المؤم...

تم إعدام جميع ا...

تم إعدام جميع الموقعين السبعة على الإعلان من قبل الجيش البريطاني (تم إعدام جيمس كونولي الذي أصيب في ...