IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v14y2017i11p1306-d116684.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Perception and Anxiety Regarding Radiation after the 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident: A Systematic Qualitative Review

Author

Listed:
  • Yoshitake Takebayashi

    (Department of Health Risk Communication, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan
    Radiation Medical Science Center for the Fukushima Health Management Survey, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

  • Yuliya Lyamzina

    (Radiation Medical Science Center for the Fukushima Health Management Survey, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

  • Yuriko Suzuki

    (Department of Adult Mental Health, National Institute of Mental Health, National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Tokyo 187-8553, Japan)

  • Michio Murakami

    (Department of Health Risk Communication, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan
    Radiation Medical Science Center for the Fukushima Health Management Survey, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima 960-1295, Japan)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to provide a review of the publications of the risk perceptions or anxiety regarding radiation among people living in Japan after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear power plant accident. Two database (MEDLINE and PsycINFO) and hand-searched the references in identified publications were searched. For each identified publication, the measurements and time related-change of risk perception and anxiety regarding radiation were summarized. Twenty-four publications were identified. Quantitative measures of risk perception or anxiety were roughly divided into two types: single-item Likert scales that measure anxiety about radiation; and theoretical, or model-based measures. Rates of Fukushima residents with radiation-related anxiety decreased from 2012 to 2015. Factors governing risk perception or radiation-related anxiety were summarized by demographics, disaster-related stressors, trusted information, and radiation-related variables. The effects of risk perception or anxiety regarding radiation were summarized as severe distress, intention to leave employment or not to return home, or other dimensions. This review provides summary of current findings on risk perception or anxiety regarding radiation in Japan after the accident. Further researches are needed about detailed statistical analysis for time-related change and causality among variables.

Suggested Citation

  • Yoshitake Takebayashi & Yuliya Lyamzina & Yuriko Suzuki & Michio Murakami, 2017. "Risk Perception and Anxiety Regarding Radiation after the 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident: A Systematic Qualitative Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-13, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:14:y:2017:i:11:p:1306-:d:116684
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/14/11/1306/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/14/11/1306/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lennart Sjöberg, 2000. "Factors in Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Baruch Fischhoff, 1995. "Risk Perception and Communication Unplugged: Twenty Years of Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 137-145, April.
    3. Takashi Sugimoto & Tomohiro Shinozaki & Takashi Naruse & Yuki Miyamoto, 2014. "Who Was Concerned about Radiation, Food Safety, and Natural Disasters after the Great East Japan Earthquake and Fukushima Catastrophe? A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey in 2012," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-8, September.
    4. Yoshinobu Sato & Naomi Hayashida & Makiko Orita & Hideko Urata & Tetsuko Shinkawa & Yoshiko Fukushima & Yumiko Nakashima & Takashi Kudo & Shunichi Yamashita & Noboru Takamura, 2015. "Factors Associated with Nurses’ Intention to Leave Their Jobs after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-8, March.
    5. Richard G. Peters & Vincent T. Covello & David B. McCallum, 1997. "The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 43-54, February.
    6. Kazuya Nakayachi & Hiromi M. Yokoyama & Satoko Oki, 2015. "Public anxiety after the 2011 Tohoku earthquake: fluctuations in hazard perception after catastrophe," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 156-169, February.
    7. Amina Sugimoto & Shuhei Nomura & Masaharu Tsubokura & Tomoko Matsumura & Kaori Muto & Mikiko Sato & Stuart Gilmour, 2013. "The Relationship between Media Consumption and Health-Related Anxieties after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-7, August.
    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. Eric E. Calloway & Alethea L. Chiappone & Harrison J. Schmitt & Daniel Sullivan & Ben Gerhardstein & Pamela G. Tucker & Jamie Rayman & Amy L. Yaroch, 2020. "Exploring Community Psychosocial Stress Related to Per- and Poly-Fluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Contamination: Lessons Learned from a Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-19, November.
    2. You Yeon Choi & Mihyun Yang & Younghyun Lee & Eunil Lee & Young Woo Jin & Ki Moon Seong, 2021. "Assessment of an Emergency Medicine System for Radiation Accidents in Korea: A State Survey of the Workers Involved the Medical Response to Radiation Accidents," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-11, March.
    3. Masatsugu Orui & Chihiro Nakayama & Yujiro Kuroda & Nobuaki Moriyama & Hajime Iwasa & Teruko Horiuchi & Takeo Nakayama & Minoru Sugita & Seiji Yasumura, 2020. "The Association between Utilization of Media Information and Current Health Anxiety Among the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster Evacuees," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-12, June.
    4. Michio Murakami & Yoshitake Takebayashi & Yoshihito Takeda & Akiko Sato & Yasumasa Igarashi & Kazumi Sano & Tetsuo Yasutaka & Wataru Naito & Sumire Hirota & Aya Goto & Tetsuya Ohira & Seiji Yasumura &, 2018. "Effect of Radiological Countermeasures on Subjective Well-Being and Radiation Anxiety after the 2011 Disaster: The Fukushima Health Management Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, January.
    5. Joel Rasmussen & Mats Eriksson & Johan Martinsson, 2022. "Citizens’ Communication Needs and Attitudes to Risk in a Nuclear Accident Scenario: A Mixed Methods Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-17, June.
    6. Xizheng Xu & Ying Fan & Yunpeng Wu & Senlin Zhou, 2022. "Authenticity Mediates the Relationship between Risk Perception of COVID-19 and Subjective Well-Being: A Daily Diary Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-11, October.
    7. Yuya Kashiwazaki & Hitomi Matsunaga & Makiko Orita & Yasuyuki Taira & Keiko Oishi & Noboru Takamura, 2022. "Occupational Difficulties of Disaster-Affected Local Government Employees in the Long-Term Recovery Phase after the Fukushima Nuclear Accident: A Cross-Sectional Study Using Modeling Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-10, March.
    8. Koya Ogura & Masahiro Hosoda & Yuki Tamakuma & Takahito Suzuki & Ryohei Yamada & Ryoju Negami & Takakiyo Tsujiguchi & Masaru Yamaguchi & Yoshitaka Shiroma & Kazuki Iwaoka & Naofumi Akata & Mayumi Shim, 2021. "Discriminative Measurement of Absorbed Dose Rates in Air from Natural and Artificial Radionuclides in Namie Town, Fukushima Prefecture," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-16, January.
    9. Masatsugu Orui & Satomi Nakajima & Yui Takebayashi & Akiko Ito & Maho Momoi & Masaharu Maeda & Seiji Yasumura & Hitoshi Ohto, 2018. "Mental Health Recovery of Evacuees and Residents from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident after Seven Years—Contribution of Social Network and a Desirable Lifestyle," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-16, October.
    10. Masatsugu Orui & Maiko Fukasawa & Naoko Horikoshi & Yuriko Suzuki & Norito Kawakami, 2020. "Development and Evaluation of a Gatekeeper Training Program Regarding Anxiety about Radiation Health Effects Following a Nuclear Power Plant Accident: A Single-Arm Intervention Pilot Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-15, June.
    11. Tomoo Hidaka & Takeyasu Kakamu & Shota Endo & Hideaki Kasuga & Yusuke Masuishi & Tomohiro Kumagai & Sei Sato & Takuma Sasaki & Tetsuhito Fukushima, 2019. "Association of Anxiety over Radiation Exposure and Acquisition of Knowledge Regarding Occupational Health Management in Operation Leader Candidates of Radioactivity Decontamination Workers in Fukushim," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Shuhei Nomura & Michio Murakami, 2018. "Public Health Preparedness for and Response to Nuclear Disasters: An Editorial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-4, November.

    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. Matt Baucum & Heather Rosoff & Richard John & William Burns & Paul Slovic, 2018. "Modeling public responses to soft-target transportation terror," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 239-249, June.
    2. Bart Vyncke & Tanja Perko & Baldwin Van Gorp, 2017. "Information Sources as Explanatory Variables for the Belgian Health‐Related Risk Perception of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 570-582, March.
    3. Sjöberg, Lennart, 2003. "Risk communication between experts and the public: perceptions and intentions," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2003:13, Stockholm School of Economics.
    4. P. Marijn Poortvliet & Anne Marike Lokhorst, 2016. "The Key Role of Experiential Uncertainty when Dealing with Risks: Its Relationships with Demand for Regulation and Institutional Trust," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1615-1629, August.
    5. Toddi Steelman & Sarah McCaffrey & Anne-Lise Velez & Jason Briefel, 2015. "What information do people use, trust, and find useful during a disaster? Evidence from five large wildfires," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 76(1), pages 615-634, March.
    6. Sean Lonnquist & Deborah Gallagher, 2021. "Use of Fracking Information Disclosure Policies to Reduce Uncertainty in Risk‐Based Decisions," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(3), pages 326-346, May.
    7. Michio Murakami & Masaharu Tsubokura & Kyoko Ono & Shuhei Nomura & Tomoyoshi Oikawa, 2017. "Additional risk of diabetes exceeds the increased risk of cancer caused by radiation exposure after the Fukushima disaster," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-14, September.
    8. Floris Goerlandt & Jie Li & Genserik Reniers, 2020. "The Landscape of Risk Communication Research: A Scientometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-31, May.
    9. Theresa A. K. Knoblauch & Michael Stauffacher & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2018. "Communicating Low‐Probability High‐Consequence Risk, Uncertainty and Expert Confidence: Induced Seismicity of Deep Geothermal Energy and Shale Gas," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(4), pages 694-709, April.
    10. Kazuya Nakayachi & Kazuhisa Nagaya, 2016. "The Effects of the Passage of Time from the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake on the Public’s Anxiety about a Variety of Hazards," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-12, August.
    11. Frédéric Vandermoere, 2008. "Hazard Perception, Risk Perception, and the Need for Decontamination by Residents Exposed to Soil Pollution: The Role of Sustainability and the Limits of Expert Knowledge," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 387-398, April.
    12. Branden B. Johnson & Brendon Swedlow, 2021. "Cultural Theory's Contributions to Risk Analysis: A Thematic Review with Directions and Resources for Further Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 429-455, March.
    13. Mei‐Fang Chen, 2008. "Consumer Trust in Food Safety—A Multidisciplinary Approach and Empirical Evidence from Taiwan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1553-1569, December.
    14. Nicolás C. Bronfman & Luis Abdón Cifuentes & Michael L. deKay & Henry H. Willis, 2007. "Accounting for Variation in the Explanatory Power of the Psychometric Paradigm: The Effects of Aggregation and Focus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 527-554, June.
    15. Melissa Matlock & Suellen Hopfer & Oladele A. Ogunseitan, 2019. "Communicating Risk for a Climate-Sensitive Disease: A Case Study of Valley Fever in Central California," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-15, September.
    16. Michalis Diakakis & Dimitris G. Damigos & Andreas Kallioras, 2020. "Identification of Patterns and Influential Factors on Civil Protection Personnel Opinions and Views on Different Aspects of Flood Risk Management: The Case of Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-20, July.
    17. O O Ibitayo & K D Pijawka, 1999. "Reversing NIMBY: An Assessment of State Strategies for Siting Hazardous-Waste Facilities," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 17(4), pages 379-389, August.
    18. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:3:p:513-546 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Ann Bostrom & Ragnar E. Löfstedt, 2003. "Communicating Risk: Wireless and Hardwired," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 241-248, April.
    20. Saravanamuthu, Kala & Lehman, Cheryl, 2013. "Enhancing stakeholder interaction through environmental risk accounts," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 410-437.
    21. Hye Kyung Kim & Yungwook Kim, 2019. "Risk Information Seeking and Processing About Particulate Air Pollution in South Korea: The Roles of Cultural Worldview," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(5), pages 1071-1087, May.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:14:y:2017:i:11:p:1306-:d:116684. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.