Who Reaps the Benefits, Who Bears the Risks? Comparative Optimism, Comparative Utility, and Regulatory Preferences for Mobile Phone Technology

Although the issue of risk target (e.g., self, others, children) is widely acknowledged in risk perception research, its importance appears underappreciated. To date, most research has been satisfied with demonstrating comparative optimism, i.e., lower perceived risk for the self than others, and exploring its moderators, such as perceived controllability and personal exposure. Much less research has investigated how the issue of target may affect benefit perceptions or key outcomes such as stated preferences for hazard regulation. The current research investigated these issues using data from a public survey of attitudes toward mobile phone technology (N= 1,320). First, results demonstrated comparative optimism for this hazard, and also found moderating effects of both controllability and personal exposure. Second, there was evidence of comparative utility, i.e., users believed that the benefits from mobile phone technology are greater for the self than others. Third, and most important for policy, preferences for handset regulation were best predicted by perceptions of the risks to others but perceived benefits for the self. Results suggest a closer awareness of target can improve prediction of stated preferences for hazard regulation and that it would be profitable for future research to pay more attention to the issue of target for both risk and benefit perceptions.

[1]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits , 1978 .

[2]  N. Weinstein Unrealistic optimism about future life events , 1980 .

[3]  P. Slovic Perception of risk. , 1987, Science.

[4]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework , 1988 .

[5]  F P McKenna,et al.  Exploring the limits of optimism: the case of smokers' decision making. , 1993, British journal of psychology.

[6]  J. van der Pligt,et al.  Perceiving AIDS-related risks: accuracy as a function of differences in actual risk , 1994 .

[7]  M. L. Klotz,et al.  Personal contact, individuation, and the better-than-average effect. , 1995 .

[8]  Peter R. Harris,et al.  Sufficient grounds for optimism? The relationship between perceived controllability and optimistic bias , 1996 .

[9]  W. Klein,et al.  Unrealistic Optimism: Present and Future , 1996 .

[10]  Richard Shepherd,et al.  Public Concerns in the United Kingdom about General and Specific Applications of Genetic Engineering: Risk, Benefit, and Ethics , 1997, Science, technology & human values.

[11]  L. Sjöberg,et al.  Factors in risk perception. , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[12]  Stephen M. Johnson,et al.  The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits , 2000 .

[13]  G. Gaskell,et al.  Worlds apart? The reception of genetically modified foods in Europe and the U.S. , 1999, Science.

[14]  James A. Shepperd,et al.  Exploring the causes of comparative optimism. , 2002 .

[15]  Holger Schütz,et al.  The Social Amplification of Risk: Understanding amplification of complex risk issues: the risk story model applied to the EMF case , 2003 .

[16]  Mathew P White,et al.  Risk Perceptions of Mobile Phone Use While Driving , 2004, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[17]  G. Gaskell,et al.  GM Foods and the Misperception of Risk Perception , 2004, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[18]  Sabine Pahl,et al.  Comparative optimism for environmental risks , 2005 .

[19]  Gene Rowe,et al.  Using Surveys in Public Participation Processes for Risk Decision Making: The Case of the 2003 British GM Nation? Public Debate , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[20]  Wouter Poortinga,et al.  Trust in Risk Regulation: Cause or Consequence of the Acceptability of GM Food? , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[21]  Michael Siegrist,et al.  Perception of Mobile Phone and Base Station Risks , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.