Abstract
In the wake of the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident, to facilitate evidence-based risk communication we need to understand radiation risk perception and the effectiveness of risk-comparison information. We measured and characterized perceptions of dread risks and unknown risks regarding dietary radionuclides in residents of Fukushima, Tokyo, and Osaka to identify the primary factors among location, evacuation experience, gender, age, employment status, absence/presence of spouse, children and grandchildren, educational background, humanities/science courses, smoking habits, and various types of trustworthy information sources. We then evaluated the effects of these factors and risk-comparison information on multiple outcomes, including subjective and objective understanding, perceived magnitude of risk, perceived accuracy of information, backlash against information, and risk acceptance. We also assessed how risk-comparison information affected these multiple outcomes for people with high risk perception. Online questionnaires were completed by people (n = 9249) aged from 20 to 69 years in the three prefectures approximately 5 years after the accident. We gave each participant one of 15 combinations of numerical risk data and risk-comparison information, including information on standards, smoking-associated risk, and cancer risk, in accordance with Covello’s guidelines. Dread-risk perception among Fukushima residents with no experience of evacuation was much lower than that in Osaka residents, whereas evacuees had strikingly higher dread-risk perception, irrespective of whether their evacuation had been compulsory or voluntary. We identified location (distance from the nuclear power station), evacuation experience, and trust of central government as primary factors. Location (including evacuation experience) and trust of central government were significantly associated with the multiple outcomes above. Only information on “cancer risk from radiation and smoking risk” enhanced both subjective and objective understanding without diminishing trust in all participants and in the high dread-risk perception group; use of other risk-comparison information could lead the public to overestimate risk.
Highlights
The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident after the Great East Japan Earthquake on 11 March 2011 spread radionuclides and contaminated foods and drinking water
We evaluated the effects of these factors and risk-comparison information on multiple outcomes, including subjective and objective understanding, perceived magnitude of risk, perceived accuracy of information, backlash against information, and risk acceptance
Factor 1 was typified by cancer risk, a fatal effect on health, effects on future generations, and intuitive dread, whereas Factor 2 represented whether the health effects of radiation were scientifically elucidated and whether these effects were immediate
Summary
The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident after the Great East Japan Earthquake on 11 March 2011 spread radionuclides and contaminated foods and drinking water. Perception, and acceptance of risk, or of trust of the information provided, are considered to differ according to the risk-comparison information provided. Because the effects of risk-comparison information likely depend on individual risk perceptions, which are primary factors in decision-making [9,22], analysis of the relationship between effects and risk perception would be useful for providers in choosing their riskcomparison information This would promote effective risk communication and would help recipients to understand numerical risk information, provided that the providers’ risk communication was fair and justifiable. The logical steps are to understand the factors involved in radiation risk perception and to investigate the effects of risk-comparison information on different risk-perception groups by using multiple outcomes, including level of understanding, perception and acceptance of risk, and trust of information. We investigated the relationship between Slovic’s two dimensions of risk perception and the riskcomparison information
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
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 call