IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i23p13188-d690328.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Landscape of Risk Perception Research: A Scientometric Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Floris Goerlandt

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H 4R2, Canada)

  • Jie Li

    (National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China
    State Key Laboratory of Explosion Science and Technology, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
    College of Safety Science and Engineering, Liaoning Technical University, Huludao 125105, China)

  • Genserik Reniers

    (Safety and Security Science, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, 2600 AA Delft, The Netherlands
    Antwerp Research Group on Safety and Security (ARGoSS), Faculty of Applied Economics, University of Antwerp, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium
    Centre for Economics and Corporate Sustainability (CEDON), KU Leuven, 1000 Brussels, Belgium)

Abstract

Risk perception is important in organizational and societal governance contexts. This article presents a high-level analysis of risk perception research using Web of Science core collection databases, scientometrics methods and visualization tools. The focus is on trends in outputs, geographical and temporal trends, and patterns in the associated scientific categories. Thematic clusters and temporal dynamics of focus topics are identified using keyword analysis. A co-citation analysis is performed to identify the evolution of research fronts and key documents. The results indicate that research output is growing fast, with most contributions originating from western countries. The domain is highly interdisciplinary, rooted in psychology and social sciences, but branching into domains related to environmental sciences, medicine, and engineering. Significant research themes focus on perceptions related to health, with a focus on cancer, human immunodeficiency virus, and epidemiology, natural hazards and major disasters, traffic accidents, technological and industrial risks, and customer trust. Risk perception research originated from consumer choice decisions, with subsequent research fronts focusing on understanding the risk perception concept, and on developing taxonomies and measurement methods. Applied research fronts focus on environmental hazards, traffic accidents, breast cancer and, more recently, e-commerce transactions and flood risk. Based on the results, various avenues for future research are described.

Suggested Citation

  • Floris Goerlandt & Jie Li & Genserik Reniers, 2021. "The Landscape of Risk Perception Research: A Scientometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-26, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:23:p:13188-:d:690328
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/23/13188/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/23/13188/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aria, Massimo & Cuccurullo, Corrado, 2017. "bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 959-975.
    2. Chaomei Chen & Fidelia Ibekwe‐SanJuan & Jianhua Hou, 2010. "The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple‐perspective cocitation analysis," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(7), pages 1386-1409, July.
    3. Nancy Kraus & Torbjörn Malmfors & Paul Slovic, 1992. "Intuitive Toxicology: Expert and Lay Judgments of Chemical Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(2), pages 215-232, June.
    4. Chaomei Chen, 2006. "CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(3), pages 359-377, February.
    5. Lennart Sjöberg, 2000. "Factors in Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    6. Andy Stirling, 2007. "A General Framework for Analysing Diversity in Science, Technology and Society," SPRU Working Paper Series 156, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    7. Paul Slovic & Melissa L. Finucane & Ellen Peters & Donald G. MacGregor, 2004. "Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 311-322, April.
    8. Roger E. Kasperson & Ortwin Renn & Paul Slovic & Halina S. Brown & Jacque Emel & Robert Goble & Jeanne X. Kasperson & Samuel Ratick, 1988. "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 177-187, June.
    9. Judy Lawrence & Dorothee Quade & Julia Becker, 2014. "Integrating the effects of flood experience on risk perception with responses to changing climate risk," 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. 74(3), pages 1773-1794, December.
    10. Ellen M. Peters & Burt Burraston & C. K. Mertz, 2004. "An Emotion‐Based Model of Risk Perception and Stigma Susceptibility: Cognitive Appraisals of Emotion, Affective Reactivity, Worldviews, and Risk Perceptions in the Generation of Technological Stigma," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5), pages 1349-1367, October.
    11. Bradley J. Cardinale & J. Emmett Duffy & Andrew Gonzalez & David U. Hooper & Charles Perrings & Patrick Venail & Anita Narwani & Georgina M. Mace & David Tilman & David A. Wardle & Ann P. Kinzig & Gre, 2012. "Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 486(7401), pages 59-67, June.
    12. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/61ih2qtadc8g1894enmudd2f09 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Loet Leydesdorff & Ismael Rafols & Chaomei Chen, 2013. "Interactive overlays of journals and the measurement of interdisciplinarity on the basis of aggregated journal–journal citations," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(12), pages 2573-2586, December.
    14. Chaomei Chen & Fidelia Ibekwe-SanJuan & Jianhua Hou, 2010. "The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple-perspective cocitation analysis," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(7), pages 1386-1409, July.
    15. Cho, Sang-Hee & Ali, Faizan & Manhas, Parikshat Singh, 2018. "Examining the impact of risk perceptions on intentions to travel by air: A comparison of full -service carriers and low-cost carriers," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 20-27.
    16. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    17. Nancy Nighswonger Kraus & Paul Slovic, 1988. "Taxonomic Analysis of Perceived Risk: Modeling Individual and Group Perceptions Within Homogeneous Hazard Domains," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), pages 435-455, September.
    18. Gisela Wachinger & Ortwin Renn & Chloe Begg & Christian Kuhlicke, 2013. "The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1049-1065, June.
    19. Henry Small, 1973. "Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 24(4), pages 265-269, July.
    20. Björn Hammarfelt, 2011. "Interdisciplinarity and the intellectual base of literature studies: citation analysis of highly cited monographs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 705-725, March.
    21. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2010. "Risk Management and Governance," Risk, Governance and Society, Springer, number 978-3-642-13926-0, March.
    22. Mingers, John & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2015. "A review of theory and practice in scientometrics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 1-19.
    23. Wolff, Jonathan, 2006. "Risk, Fear, Blame, Shame And The Regulation Of Public Safety," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 409-427, November.
    24. Olle Persson, 1994. "The intellectual base and research fronts of JASIS 1986–1990," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 45(1), pages 31-38, January.
    25. Becker, M.H. & Joseph, J.G., 1988. "AIDS and behavioral change to reduce risk: A review," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 78(4), pages 394-410.
    26. García-Lillo, Francisco & Claver-Cortés, Enrique & Marco-Lajara, Bartolomé & Úbeda-García, Mercedes, 2019. "Identifying the ‘knowledge base’ or ‘intellectual structure’ of research on international business, 2000–2015: A citation/co-citation analysis of JIBS," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 713-726.
    27. Michael K. Lindell & Seong Nam Hwang, 2008. "Households' Perceived Personal Risk and Responses in a Multihazard Environment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 539-556, April.
    28. P. Bubeck & W. J. W. Botzen & J. C. J. H. Aerts, 2012. "A Review of Risk Perceptions and Other Factors that Influence Flood Mitigation Behavior," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1481-1495, September.
    29. Michael K. Lindell & Ronald W. Perry, 2012. "The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 616-632, April.
    30. Bradley J. Cardinale & J. Emmett Duffy & Andrew Gonzalez & David U. Hooper & Charles Perrings & Patrick Venail & Anita Narwani & Georgina M. Mace & David Tilman & David A.Wardle & Ann P. Kinzig & Gret, 2012. "Correction: Corrigendum: Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 489(7415), pages 326-326, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Saulo Cardoso Maia & Gideon Carvalho Benedicto & José Willer Prado & David Alastair Robb & Oscar Neto Almeida Bispo & Mozar José Brito, 2019. "Mapping the literature on credit unions: a bibliometric investigation grounded in Scopus and Web of Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(3), pages 929-960, September.
    3. Shuo Xu & Liyuan Hao & Xin An & Hongshen Pang & Ting Li, 2020. "Review on emerging research topics with key-route main path analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 607-624, January.
    4. Andrej Kastrin & Dimitar Hristovski, 2021. "Scientometric analysis and knowledge mapping of literature-based discovery (1986–2020)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1415-1451, February.
    5. Huixin Wang & Jing Xie & Shixian Luo & Duy Thong Ta & Qian Wang & Jiao Zhang & Daer Su & Katsunori Furuya, 2023. "Exploring the Interplay between Landscape Planning and Human Well-Being: A Scientometric Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-24, June.
    6. 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.
    7. Xuemei Fang & Liang Cao & Luyi Zhang & Binbin Peng, 2023. "Risk perception and resistance behavior intention of residents living near chemical industry parks: an empirical analysis in China," 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. 115(2), pages 1655-1675, January.
    8. Daniela Knuth & Doris Kehl & Lynn Hulse & Silke Schmidt, 2014. "Risk Perception, Experience, and Objective Risk: A Cross‐National Study with European Emergency Survivors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1286-1298, July.
    9. Elisabeth Maidl & David N. Bresch & Matthias Buchecker, 2021. "Social integration matters: factors influencing natural hazard risk preparedness—a survey of Swiss households," 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. 105(2), pages 1861-1890, January.
    10. Adloff, Susann, 2021. "Adapting to Climate Change: Threat Experience, Cognition and Protection Motivation," VfS Annual Conference 2021 (Virtual Conference): Climate Economics 242400, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    11. Daniele Rotolo & Ismael Rafols & Michael Hopkins & Loet Leydesdorff, 2014. "Scientometric Mapping as a Strategic Intelligence Tool for the Governance of Emerging Technologies," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-10, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    12. Minxi Wang & Ping Liu & Rui Zhang & Zhi Li & Xin Li, 2020. "A Scientometric Analysis of Global Health Research," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-19, April.
    13. Carlos Olmeda-Gómez & Carlos Romá-Mateo & Maria-Antonia Ovalle-Perandones, 2019. "Overview of trends in global epigenetic research (2009–2017)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1545-1574, June.
    14. Julie L. Demuth, 2018. "Explicating Experience: Development of a Valid Scale of Past Hazard Experience for Tornadoes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1921-1943, September.
    15. Mertens, K. & Jacobs, L. & Maes, J. & Poesen, J. & Kervyn, M. & Vranken, L., 2018. "Disaster risk reduction among households exposed to landslide hazard: A crucial role for self-efficacy?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 77-91.
    16. Gisleine Carmo & Luiz Flávio Felizardo & Valderí Castro Alcântara & Cristiane Aparecida Silva & José Willer Prado, 2023. "The impact of Jürgen Habermas’s scientific production: a scientometric review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1853-1875, March.
    17. Pin Li & Guoli Yang & Chuanqi Wang, 2019. "Visual topical analysis of library and information science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1753-1791, December.
    18. Ewa Lechowska, 2018. "What determines flood risk perception? A review of factors of flood risk perception and relations between its basic elements," 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. 94(3), pages 1341-1366, December.
    19. Matthew Billman & Kayode Atoba & Courtney Thompson & Samuel Brody, 2023. "How about Now? Changes in Risk Perception before and after Hurricane Irma," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-19, May.
    20. Hongmei Guan & Taozhen Huang & Xin Guo, 2023. "Knowledge Mapping of Tourist Experience Research: Based on CiteSpace Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(2), pages 21582440231, April.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:23:p:13188-:d:690328. 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.