IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceps/v44y2010i3p130-140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Right answers and right-wrong answers: Sources of information influencing knowledge of nuclear-related information

Author

Listed:
  • Greenberg, Michael
  • Truelove, Heather

Abstract

Surveys in 2008 and 2009 asked almost 6000 United States residents to indicate their knowledge about the use of nuclear and other sources of energy, and the disposition of nuclear waste. Less than 10% of respondents knew where spent commercial nuclear fuel is stored. With regard to knowledge about fuel for electrical energy, respondents overestimated solar and wind use and underestimated coal use. These responses are consistent with mass media coverage of these issues. The mass media were the source of information for the vast majority of respondents. However, the likelihood of right answers to our questions increased as reliance on the mass media decreased, and it increased with use of books, magazines, personal contacts and the web. Educated affluent white males with strong preferences for nuclear energy disproportionately were knowledgeable. These observations demonstrate the daunting challenge of providing information about subjects that are largely distant and disconnected from the public's lives. The Department of Energy, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, state and local health, environmental and energy agencies, and facility owners and operators have huge domestic political, national security and economic stakes in improving the factual grounding of public reactions to energy production and waste management choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Greenberg, Michael & Truelove, Heather, 2010. "Right answers and right-wrong answers: Sources of information influencing knowledge of nuclear-related information," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 130-140, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:44:y:2010:i:3:p:130-140
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038-0121(10)00013-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joan Costa-Font & Elias Mossialos & Caroline Rudisill, 2009. "Optimism and the perceptions of new risks," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 27-41, January.
    2. Greenberg, Michael, 2009. "Energy sources, public policy, and public preferences: Analysis of US national and site-specific data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 3242-3249, August.
    3. Wouter Poortinga & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2003. "Exploring the Dimensionality of Trust in Risk Regulation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5), pages 961-972, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. He, Guizhen & Mol, Arthur P.J. & Zhang, Lei & Lu, Yonglong, 2013. "Public participation and trust in nuclear power development in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 1-11.
    2. Michael Greenberg & Heather Barnes Truelove, 2011. "Energy Choices and Risk Beliefs: Is It Just Global Warming and Fear of a Nuclear Power Plant Accident?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 819-831, May.
    3. Morrone, Michele & Basta, Tania B. & Somerville, Jennifer, 2012. "Framing the national nuclear legacy at the local level: Implications for the future of federal facilities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 145-152.
    4. Jacqueline CK Lam & Victor OK Li & David M. Reiner & Yang Han & Shan Shan Wang, 2018. "Trust in Government and Effective Nuclear Safety Governance in Great Britain," Working Papers EPRG 1811, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    5. Michael R. Greenberg & Marc D. Weiner, 2014. "Keeping Surveys Valid, Reliable, and Useful: A Tutorial," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(8), pages 1362-1375, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael Greenberg & Heather Barnes Truelove, 2011. "Energy Choices and Risk Beliefs: Is It Just Global Warming and Fear of a Nuclear Power Plant Accident?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 819-831, May.
    2. Abdulla, A. & Vaishnav, P. & Sergi, B. & Victor, D.G., 2019. "Limits to deployment of nuclear power for decarbonization: Insights from public opinion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1339-1346.
    3. Corner, Adam & Venables, Dan & Spence, Alexa & Poortinga, Wouter & Demski, Christina & Pidgeon, Nick, 2011. "Nuclear power, climate change and energy security: Exploring British public attitudes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 4823-4833, September.
    4. Ho, Shirley S. & Xiong, Rui & Chuah, Agnes S.F., 2021. "Heuristic cues as perceptual filters: Factors influencing public support for nuclear research reactor in Singapore," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    5. Greenberg, Michael R., 2010. "Energy parks for former nuclear weapons sites? Public preferences at six regional locations and the United States as a whole," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5098-5107, September.
    6. John C. Besley, 2012. "Does Fairness Matter in the Context of Anger About Nuclear Energy Decision Making?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(1), pages 25-38, January.
    7. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Siegrist, Michael, 2012. "Fair play in energy policy decisions: Procedural fairness, outcome fairness and acceptance of the decision to rebuild nuclear power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 292-300.
    8. Gupta, Kuhika & Nowlin, Matthew C. & Ripberger, Joseph T. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L., 2019. "Tracking the nuclear ‘mood’ in the United States: Introducing a long term measure of public opinion about nuclear energy using aggregate survey data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    9. Ling Jia & Queena K. Qian & Frits Meijer & Henk Visscher, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Risk Perception: A Perspective for Proactive Risk Management in Residential Building Energy Retrofits in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-25, April.
    10. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Keller, Carmen & Siegrist, Michael, 2011. "Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: Investigating an explanatory model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3621-3629, June.
    11. Kazuya Nakayachi & George Cvetkovich, 2010. "Public Trust in Government Concerning Tobacco Control in Japan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 143-152, January.
    12. Roe, Brian & Teisl, Mario F., 2007. "Genetically modified food labeling: The impacts of message and messenger on consumer perceptions of labels and products," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 49-66, February.
    13. Brownlie, Julie & Howson, Alexandra, 2006. "'Between the demands of truth and government': Health practitioners, trust and immunisation work," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 433-443, January.
    14. Manley, Dawn K. & Hines, Valerie A. & Jordan, Matthew W. & Stoltz, Ronald E., 2013. "A survey of energy policy priorities in the United States: Energy supply security, economics, and the environment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 687-696.
    15. Brinkley, Catherine, 2018. "The conundrum of combustible clean energy: Sweden's history of siting district heating smokestacks in residential areas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 526-532.
    16. Lee, You-Kyung, 2020. "Sustainability of nuclear energy in Korea: From the users’ perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    17. Seong-Jae Seo & Ju-Hee Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2020. "Public Preference for Increasing Natural Gas Generation for Reducing CO 2 Emissions in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-14, March.
    18. Cousse, Julia, 2021. "Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    19. Peter Modin & Sven Hansson, 2011. "Moral and Instrumental Norms in Food Risk Communication," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(2), pages 313-324, June.
    20. Chen, Lijun & Parcell, Joe L & Chen, Chao & James, Harvey S. Jr & Xu, Danning, 2016. "Consumer preference for supermarket food sampling in China," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236043, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:44:y:2010:i:3:p:130-140. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/seps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.