Abstract
Uncertainty is a crucial issue for any risk assessment. Consequently, it also poses crucial challenges for risk communications. Many guidebooks advise reporting uncertainties in risk assessments, expecting that the audience will appreciate this disclosure. However, the empirical evidence about the effects of uncertainty reporting is sparse and inconclusive. Therefore, based on examples of potential health risks of electromagnetic fields (EMF), three experiments were conducted analysing the effects of communicating uncertainties separately for hazard identification, risk characterisation and risk protection. The setups aimed to explore how reporting and how explaining of uncertainty affects dependent variables such as risk perception, perceived competence of the risk assessors, and trust in risk management. Each of the three experiments used a 2x2 design with a first factor presenting uncertainty descriptions (as used in public controversies on EMF related health effects) or describing a certainty conditions; and a second factor explaining the causes of uncertainties (by pointing at knowledge gaps) or not explaining them. The study results indicate that qualitative uncertainty descriptions regarding hazard identification reduce the confidence in the professional competencies of the assessors. In contrast, a quantitative uncertainty description in risk characterisation–regarding the magnitude of the risk–does not affect any of the dependent variables. Concerning risk protection, trust in exposure limit values is not affected by qualitative uncertainty information. However, the qualitative description of uncertainty regarding the adequacy of protection amplifies fears. Furthermore, explaining this uncertainty results in lower text understandability.
Highlights
There is a growing interest of risk researchers in conceptualizing and dealing with uncertainty [1,2,3,4,5,6]
Experiment R1 referred to the potential risks of reduced well-being caused by electromagnetic fields (EMF) exposure of cell phones
Uncertainty description informed that the effect of radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF) exposure on wellbeing is not proven, but likely
Summary
There is a growing interest of risk researchers in conceptualizing and dealing with uncertainty [1,2,3,4,5,6]. One important question is how to communicate the uncertainties of a risk assessment to decision-makers and the public. In its handbook on risk characterization, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) [9] underlines that transparency is a principal value. It follows that describing uncertainties is an essential criterion for good risk characterization. Other scientific communities support this view too. Global climate change researchers stress the need to communicate existing uncertainty beyond the scientific community to politicians, stakeholders, and the general public [10] and have proposed some standards for uncertainty communication [5]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
