Grantee Research Project Results
The Effect of Information Materials on Risk Rankings
EPA Grant Number: U915166Title: The Effect of Information Materials on Risk Rankings
Investigators: Morgan, Kara M.
Institution: Carnegie Mellon University
EPA Project Officer: Packard, Benjamin H
Project Period: January 1, 1997 through January 1, 2000
Project Amount: $102,000
RFA: STAR Graduate Fellowships (1997) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Ecological Indicators/Assessment/Restoration , Fellowship - Risk Communication , Academic Fellowships
Objective:
The objective of this research project is to learn about how lay participants incorporate narrative risk information, attribute-based risk information, and personal experience into risk-ranking judgments.
Approach:
Rankings are collected from participants using one of four different types of information materials. The four types of information materials are: (1) narrative-only; (2) table-only; (3) narrative and table; and (4) summary sheet, which contains narrative, and table, and three additional sections of text providing more detailed information about the risk. A within-condition comparison uses the average pair-wise correlation between the rankings within condition will be calculated to assess consistency, that is (i.e., how similar the rankings are across these participants). A bootstrap method is used to generate a distribution of differences in correlations to determine if the differences between the levels of agreement using the different information materials are significant. For between-condition analysis, one average ranking is produced to represent each condition, and these rankings are compared.
Supplemental Keywords:
fellowship, risk ranking, risk-ranking judgements, correlations, between-condition analysis., RFA, Scientific Discipline, ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, Economic, Social, & Behavioral Science Research Program, Economics & Decision Making, decision-making, Social Science, Psychology, Risk Assessment, deliberative policy, environmental decision making, risk characterization, risk ranking, decision analysis, information dissemination, behavior reactions, risk communication, decision making, environmental risk assessmentProgress and Final Reports:
The perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.